From hpstapp@lbl.gov Wed Nov 2 14:46:51 2011 Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 14:46:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Henry P. Stapp To: Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal Subject: Re: Queries in your 2001 article [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "ISO-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] On Tue, 1 Nov 2011, Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal wrote: > Dear Henry, Thanks for further elaboration. I am in the process of reading your very interesting article (Stapp, 2001). I have further queries: (1) Is the physical aspect that appears mindlike nondual the same as our human minds? As you know, human mind includes our subjective experiences (SEs, such as redness) of external objects, self, feelings, thoughts, intentions, knowledge, and so on. HPS: The physical aspect that appears mindlike, namely the evolving quantum state, is dualist. It is the part/component/aspect of mentalistic nature that defines and constitutes the physical. Just as we can contemplate (strictly in our minds) a space-time structure, with mathematical properies attached to space-time points, so can basically mentalistic nature do the same. This mentalistic construction by nature is an objective analog of our human theoretical constuctions, which are basically subjective, although they can be in some sense shared, in the sense that different scientists can contemplate, and communicate about, essentially the same mental image. (2) Is the human-brain (mindlike physical aspect/quantum brain) the same as human-mind (mental aspect)? HPS: No! The brain of a human person is the part of the physical aspect of nature that is the principal object of scrutiny for the probing actions on the part of mentalistic nature that constitutes the essence of that human person. (3) Do you accept wave-particle dual-aspect of quantum state (wavicle) for quantum entities such as photons and electrons (e.g., photoelectric effect for particle-aspect and interference-effect for wave-aspect)? HPS: The evolving quantum state of the photon is an aspect of the evolving quantum state of the universe. That state is wave-like! The particle-like aspect is associated with an observation, and the associated collapse. The apparatus is constructed so as to actualize, in conjunction with a mental event in the life of the probing person, some observable property of the the physical state of the mentalistic universe, and simultaneously, by virtue of the structure of the apparatus, some microscopically defined quantum state of the universe, in accordance with von Neumann's laws of quantum mechanics. This observable property might be the state (exposed or unexposed) of a silver iodide crystal in a photographic emulsion. If the actualized state of the crystal is the 'exposed' state, then photon will have been absorbed by the crystal, and have deposited in the crystal its entire allotment (quantum) of energy and momentum. This reduction/collapse of the quantum state constitutes the particle-like property of the photon. (4) Is the physical aspect of quantum state (in your framework) wave aspect, particle aspect, or both? HPS: The quantum state is always basically wavelike. But it collapses in conjunction with each experience. The collapse is to a new brain state that is not particle-like: it extends over a large portion of the brain. So the brain is like an apparatus in that it creates a dynamical connection between a mentalistic observation and a physicalistic property, but this physicalistic property is macroscopically extended state of the brain, which is made up of trillions of particles, and hence ought not be described as particle-like. (5) As per (Stapp, 2001), "Our bodies and brains thus become, in von Neumann's approach, parts of the quantum mechanically described physical universe." "It postulates, for each observer, that each experiential event is connected in a certain specified way to a corresponding brain event." "This choice on the part of the mind-brain-body system that constitutes the individual is, in this specific sense, a free choice: it is not governed by the physical laws of contemporary physics (i.e., quantum theory). This freedom constitutes a logical 'gap' in the dynamical rules of quantum theory."   In your framework, (a) Precisely how are intentions and subjective experiences (SEs, qualia) connected with mindlike brain? HPS: In this framework reality is mental. But this universal mental reality has substructures. One such substructure is the mentally conceived evolving quantum state of the universe. Other substuctures are the evolving mental realities that constitute the individual essence of existing persons. These later mental realities generally involve levels that lie beneath the level of conscious awareness that we identify as a stream of conscious experiences. This allows both primitive life forms to have associated mentalities, and human beings to acquire mental qualities via subliminal stimulations A person's stream of experiences and the mindlike brain are both subsystems of the overarching universal mind. They of the same basic currency, and are components of the same basic structure. Through trial-and-error learning the purposeful knowledge-aquiring personal mind finds out which kinds of sequences of probing actions upon his or her brain produce intended experienced feedbacks. And repeated rehearsals ingrain automatic learned responses to triggering intentions (b) From where do intentions and SEs pop up? HPS: Immediate intentions arise from reasons, which stem from the mental history of the individual person, and the innate capacity of individual person's to possess reasons and purposes, based upon meanings. Sense experiences are outcomes of probing actions initiated by the individual person. The outcomes are chosen by nature, and delivered by nature. Thus the person is a small part of a giant mental world that is responding to the person's intentional actions. (c) How do you close the logical "gap" between human-mind and mindlike physical aspect?   I have just explained this! (6) It seems that human-mind (such as intentions, SEs, thoughts, etc) is still not coherently unified with mindlike physical aspect; and it still seems that observer˙˙s mind is inserted in the framework by hand. HPS: I have answered your questions 1-5, and thereby explained how coherent unification is achieved, by using the detailed form von Neumann's formulation, which specifies how the inputs from the observer and from nature conspire in a coherent way to connect the intentions of the person to the quantum events in his brain. Observer˙˙s mind and the Nature (brain-body-environment) are still distinct, but interact at synapses as in Eccles˙˙ interactive substance dualism framework, except brain is mindlike nondual entity interacting with human-mind in your framework.   HPS: No! I am using von Neumann's formulation, and the interaction is via the observer's intentional actions and nature's collapsing response, which brings in the machinery provided by nature. The actions initiated by the person trigger responses by nature that actualize macroscopic brain states that have been coordinated through trial-and-error learning to the reason-based intentions of the person. It appears that observer˙˙s mind (intention, SEs/qualia, etc) can exist without brain, but not vice-versa (mindlike-brain potentially exist, which is realized when human-mind causes collapse). HPS: A person's essence, a mind, might exist without a brain that it is continually probing, and a brain could exist that is not being probed by any personal mind. A normal living person is the person's mental essence and a brain that it is continually probing.   Do I understand all the above correctly? HPS: I hope my replies have increased your understanding..   (7) As per (Stapp, 2001), "The second process involves an event that has both physical and mental aspects." This seems that you are sympathetic to dual-aspect monism: is this correct?   HPS: I think that my quantum-physics-based model gives an understanding of nature that is basically mentalistic, but incorporates the physicalistic aspects in the way specified by orthodox quantum mechanics.   Thanks. Regards, Ram 11/1/11 Stapp, H. P. (2001). Quantum Theory and the Role of Mind in Nature. Foundations of Physics, 31, 1465-1499. . and   ---------------------------------------------------------- RAm Lakhan PAndey Vimal, Ph.D. Professor (Research) Vision Research Institute, Neuroscience Department 25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 and 428 Great Road, Suite 11, Acton, MA 01720, USA Ph: +1 978 263 5028; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907 Emails: rlpvimal@yahoo.co.in, rlpvimal@gmail.com URLs: http://sites.google.com/site/rlpvimal/Home; http://www.webmedcentral.com/faculty/view_all_faculty; http://www.linkedin.com/in/rlpvimal; network.nature.com/profile/ram; www.quantumbionet.org/eng/index.php?pagina=152 [ Part 2, "Reason and Retrocausation" Application/MSWORD (Name: ] [ "ReasonFP.doc") 96 KB. ] [ Unable to print this part. ]