Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 10:00:24 -0700 From: gordon g globus Subject: Experiments on Attention and Quantum Theory--Henry Stapp MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Henry Stapp Subject: Experiments on Attention and Quantum Theory Stan Klein inquired about what sort of experiments pertaining to attention I had in mind that might distinguish between classical and quantum theories of the mind-brain system, and expressed a strong belief that no such experiments could ever be found. The experiments of Libet, Koler's and Grunau, Grey Walters have focussed attention (See my book MM&QM Sec. 1.10) on peculiar timing reversals in quantum mechanics, relative to what classical physics demands. Recent postings of mine on q-mind have again stressed this point. Jeffery Schwartz has alerted me to the fact that experiments at Yale on Tourettes Syndrome (Tic) suppression by attentional action (mental force) are going to be filmed at very high speeds. If one models the mentally forced supression of TIC expression by a Zeno-type holding of a mental state in place against the normal dynamical brain activity then the question arises whether there could be any precursive effects of a sudden externally demanded turning off of this mental effort. According to classical physics there could be no such precursive effect in a properly designed experiment: the effect of turning off the effort should be later than the turning off of the effort. But in a quantum mechanical model of the mind-brain there will be a host of slightly differing superposed overlapping potentialities for the next experiential events all competing for actualization. These potentialities will have been formed by brain activities at slightly earlier times, and, as in the discussion of Einstein set-up described on my earlier posting, the picking out of one experience will actualize the whole state that leads up to that experience, and all subsequent human observations will be condordant with the requirement that during the interval prior to the experience the brain state will be the brain state that leads to this experience. So if the sequence of experiences is held rigidly in place up to some time T, and then suddenly changes to a different structure, one should expect from this quantum model that there will be some corresponding systematical changes in the brain just prior to time T, which is fixed externally. Classically there should be no such systematic precursive change. Whether this precursive change should result in a precursive change in tic expression is perhaps not so clear. But I would expect, on the basis of the model that I have been promoting in recent weeks, based on the attention-controlled Zeno effect, that there would be some precursive effects in the brain. If they are found then it would seem that classical concepts would be proven to be inadequate to describe the mind-brain system: I do not think that any precursive effect of the sudden cessation of this mental effort at an externally fixed time, in an experiment that is properly designed, executed, and analyzed, can be explained within the classical framework. Jeffery Schwartz has also informed me that technology for tapping into the spinal column are advancing rapidly. This part of the nervous system. Considerations similar to the ones just discussed suggest that if strong attention is being paid to some just-at-threshold sensation that is caused by nerve impulses traveling from, say, a foot, then a sudden externally directed cessation of that attention ought to produce what recording instruments would identify as a precursive effect in the spinal column, provided there were no actual reductions in the body except those associated with the conscious experiences. In general, it appears to me that timing anamolies within body/mind systems could provide a clean way to prove the inadaquacy of classical concepts in the study of such systems. ***************************************************************** From stapp@thsrv.lbl.gov Tue Oct 13 12:20:05 1998 Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 12:12:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Henry Stapp To: quantum-mind Cc: kleinlist , bdj10@cam.ac.uk, brings@rpi.edu, brucero@cats.ucsc.edu, chalmers@paradox.ucsc.edu, ghrosenb@ai.uga.edu, hameroff@u.arizona.edu, hpstapp@lbl.gov, "jeffery m. schwartz" , keith@imprint.co.uk, stan klein , patrickw@monash.edu.au, phayes@nuts.coginst.uwf.edu Subject: Clarification of experiments On Fri, 9 Oct 1998, Stanley Klein wrote: Henry, I'm confident that it will be quite easy for me to devise physiologically plausible mechanisms to account for any of the experiments you mentioned, without any need for quantum mechanics. Stan ***************************************************** Dear Stan, I am amazed that you believe that you can account for causal anomalies of the kind I was describing within a classical framework. You must have misunderstood what I was saying. In the experiments I was proposing the subject is holding some idea (e.g., resisting a strong urge to give in, and allow the tic to occur) in place by a strong effort of will. Then at a signal timed in some random way, and communicated to him, he turns off this willful effort. In any classical account any effect in his body/brain of this turning-off of his effort must occur *after* the signal has been sent. One must of course design, execute, and analyze the experiment with care. But in a sufficiently well designed, executed, and analyzed experiment it may be possible to identify certain changes in body/brain behavior (say at the neural level) that are reliably correlated to the time that the signal is sent. If the timing of the signal is suitably randomized to preclude any systematic correlation with the pre-existing physical/mental state of the subject if the signal is not actually transmitted to the subject, then if there is a systematic change that is correlated to signal time when the signal is communicated to the subject, and that change occurs *before* the signal is sent, then I claim that this timing anomaly would not be explainable within the normal classical-physics framework, where all such observable cause-effect correlations have cause prior to effect. Henry ************************************************** >From klein@adage.Berkeley.EDU Mon Oct 12 22:06:35 1998 Subject: precursive Henry, Thanks for the clarification of what you meant by the word "precursive" I thought you were talking about the many time anomalies that Libet found. Indeed in the experiment you clarified that violates causality I wouldn't dare to look for a classical explanation (other than the ET helpers). All of Libet's experiments, on the other hand, have easy classical explanations. Stan