You don’t
have to look far to find outlandish theories on the nature of the cosmos and
human consciousness. These days, notions once relegated to science fiction are
finding their way into esoteric academic journals, and from there, into
mainstream discourse.
One example
of this is the Simulation Argument, recently championed by Elon Musk; another
is ‘time crystals,’ a tantalizing non-linear phase of matter. The newest
symphony of mind jazz being broadcast across the Internet posits new ideas
about the embattled theory of “panpsychism,” or the belief that mind is a
fundamental property of the physical universe and is imbued into all states of
matter.
A new paper,
published by physicist Gregory Matloff, has brought the idea back into
scientific discussions, promising experimental tests that could “validate or
falsify” the concept of a ubiquitous “proto-consciousness field.” Matloff also
pushes the controversial idea of volitional stars, suggesting there is actually
evidence that stars control their own galactic paths.
As absurd as
the theory sounds, it has several prominent adherents, including British
theoretical physicist Sir Roger Penrose, who introduced panpsychism three
decades ago. Penrose believed consciousness arises from the properties of
quantum entanglement. He and anesthesiologist Stuart Hameroff authored the
Orchestrated Objective Reduction (Orch-OR) hypothesis, which asserts, among
other things, that consciousness results from quantum vibrations inside
microtubules.
In 2006,
German physicist Bernard Haisch took the idea further and proposed that
consciousness arises within a “quantum vacuum” any time there is a
significantly advanced system through which energy flows. Neuroscientist
Christof Koch, another proponent of panpsychism, approaches it from a different
angle, using integrated information theory to argue that consciousness is not
unique to biological organisms.
“The only
dominant theory we have of consciousness says that it is associated with
complexity — with a system’s ability to act upon its own state and determine
its own fate,” Koch argues. “Theory states that it could go down to very simple
systems. In principle, some purely physical systems that are not biological or
organic may also be conscious.”
Matloff and
other scientists are moving the argument into a new phase: experimentation.
Matloff intends to study the behavior of stars, specifically analyzing an
anomaly in stellar motion known as Paranego’s Discontinuity. Matloff wants to
know why certain cooler stars appear to emit jets of energy pointed in one
direction, a characteristic that seems oddly and inexplicably ubiquitous in the
galaxy. In 2018, he plans to use results from the Gaia star-mapping space
telescope to show that the anomaly may be a willful stellar action.
Meanwhile,
as Matloff studies cosmic activity on the grandest scale, Koch approaches the
experimental phase of the theory using brain-impaired patients. He wants to
know if their information responses match underlying neurochemical foundations
of consciousness. He plans to test this by wiring the brains of mice together
to see if their minds merge into a larger information system.
Panpsychism
certainly has critics, as well. In an article for The Atlantic entitled “Why
Panpsychism Is Probably Wrong,” Keith Frankish writes:
“Panpsychism
gives consciousness a curious status. It places it at the very heart of every
physical entity yet threatens to render it explanatorily idle. For the behavior
of subatomic particles and the systems they constitute promises to be fully
explained by physics and the other physical sciences. Panpsychism offers no
distinctive predictions or explanations. It finds a place for consciousness in
the physical world, but that place is a sort of limbo.”
The quote expresses
a general sense that panpsychism oversimplifies the hard problem of
consciousness in the universe, an opinion many scientists share. However,
Matloff, Penrose, and other proponents continue undertaking the job of
venturing outside the margins of accepted science to try reconciling
intractable contradictions and anomalies exposed by quantum theory.
Comments
Post a Comment