12 Consciousness is physical and microscopic
12 Consciousness is physical and microscopic
Consciousness is physical
Thinking action and consciousness are physical
The quality of consciousness is microscopic -- The work of consciousness is not fulfilled materially (Expectation)
《 Consciousness is physical 》
(Apart from others), if a person admits that his own subjective consciousness is self-evident to him, from the fact that the subjective consciousness can recognize the outside world or substances there, it can be judged that there is some point of contact between the outside world or substances and one's own subjective consciousness. And, if there is a point of contact, it follows that, at least in the input side of one's own subjective consciousness, one's own subjective consciousness has a physical aspect. In other words, if a person admits the existence of his own subjective consciousness, he has no other choice but to admit that subjective consciousness is physical. In short, consciousness is physical.
However, if a person cannot admit the perception or judgement by his own subjective consciousness himself, it's all over now. Everything becomes meaningless. This is because everything is only perceived and judged finally by the first person subject of our consciousness.
Consciousness is provided with the bodily sensing ability --the five senses--, and can perceive the body and the external world.
And, from this empirical or subjective fact, it can be immediately judged that consciousness is physical. It's because others cannot be identified (or perceived) directly and because perception bases on (a change in) the measurement of some self-state of consciousness --ultimately, some extrinsic influence in substances bringing consciousness--. And, it is because, if a change occurs in the measurement of some self-state of consciousness, it means that there is some point of contact between consciousness and brain's substances --or, more generally, the outside world--. And, if there is a point of contact with brain's substances, it necessarily follows that consciousness is also physical.
Moreover, from the theory of localization of brain action, the actional brain mapping, etc. of neuroscience and brain science the state of the brain and the state of consciousness are related with each other deeply. Furthermore, if some trouble happens to occur in the brain, consciousness may also be affected harmfully. And, consciousness is also affected surely by medicines (chemicals). In this case, it is conjectured thin the brain cells are affected by the medicine first, and it is reflected on the state of consciousness. Furthermore, from these things, it is judged that there is some point of contact between the substance called brain and its consciousness. And it follows that consciousness is also physical.
To put it shortly, consciousness is physical (as well as microscopic). It's obvious that consciousness is physical.
By the way, this judgement is one at the input side of consciousness.
(It can be judged also at the output side of consciousness. It's a case where the movement of body's substances --for example, muscular movement-- is triggered basing on the thinking action of consciousness. (However, since consciousness deals with ideas only, it doesn't output the outcome of thinking outwardly and actively --work on other actions actively-- actually. The result of thinking inside consciousness is just transmitted to other matter action). This case is described separately).
《 Thinking action and consciousness are physical 》
We think we live basing on our own ideas day after day. This is a common impression we have unconsciously.
For example, the actions of speaking, writing, playing musical instruments, painting, handling articles, operating machines, etc. are obviously bases on the thinking action within the brain. These actions will never be achieved unless the thinking action which comes to be the cause for those actions works. This is an undeniable empirical fact.
Moreover, at human bodies, not being limited to the actions of speaking, writing, etc., various kinds of macroscopic motions occur.
And, almost all macroscopic motions which occur at human beings are formed by muscular movements.
And, if some trouble happens to occur in the brain or the motor nerves, body's motions may also be impaired. This clearly means that, not being limited to the actions of speaking, writing, etc., the occurrence of muscular tissues's movements which form almost every macroscopic motion depends on the thinking action within the brain. This also be an undeniable empirical fact.
That is to say, almost all macroscopic motions of human beings are muscular movements and the occurrence depends on the thinking action within the brain. It might feel queer slightly once we have come so far, but human motions occur basing on the thinking action.
In more detail, it comes as follows.
To begin with, to make a story simple, let's suppose as follows.
In a human body, like thinking patterns to control the muscular movements, various kinds of metabolism, etc., various kinds of motional petterns and motional mechanisms to raise motions efficiently are staunchly implemented, and muscular movements composed of a series of motional petterns and motional mechanisms in the brain, the motor nerves, and the muscular tissues are also realized materially (mechanically) and fully automatically.
However, for a series of motional petterns and motional mechanisms which realizes concrete muscular movements to move, at least the movement of the head of the series (which is implemented somewhere in the brain) must be triggered by the thinking action. It's because muscular movements will never occur unless they fundamentally base on the thinking action which statically ask muscular tissues to move.
And, once muscular movements have been invoked, after that, they are auspiciously realized fully automatically.
In other words, no matter how the macroscopic motions of a human body may be automated, for the motions to actually occur, at the base level, the first motional pattern or mechanism must necessarily be started by the thinking action.
And, this thing means that the fundamental interactions, which bring first movements of substances that are in charge of the first motional pattern or mechanism, occur based on the thinking action. (Or, it may be that the fundamental interactions do not come that much as to occur, but, simply, momentum, angular momentum, or energy just occur unnaturally inside substances).
It's because matter is utterly passive and must necessarily be passively involved in the fundamental interactions to move outwardly. Matter can move for the first time after it is passively involved in the fundamental interactions. Therefore, the event that matter moves means that some fundamental interaction acts on it.
And, the event that matter moves basing on the thinking action means some fundamental interaction which moves the matter occur basing on the thinking action performed by the brain or consciousness. (Or, simply, momentum etc. may just occur unnaturally inside substances).
................
However, even if the movements of substances occur basing on the tinking action, it's not always unnatural.
It's because it's conceivable that the thinking action is not sentient (mental) as we feel, but is performed completely materially (mechanically) at the substance called brain. In this case, the movements of substances can occur just natually as the result of the movement of the thinking action.
Still, if the thinking action is not material, then the movements of substances might occur unnaturally basing on the microscopic thinking action.
a) If the thinking action is material, the movement of a living thing's body and the fundamental interactions --or, some physical actions around the fundamental interactions-- which bring it can occur naturally.
b) If the thinking action is not material, it follows that the movement of a living thing's body and the fundamental interactions --or, some physical actions around the fundamental interactions-- which bring it occur unnaturally.
So, the question of whether the thinking action is material or microscopic is important.
................
After this, the question is roughly divided into the following two cases.
1) A case where the thinking action is material. This hardly seems likely to our usual sense. However, in this case, our precious fundamental interactions --or, some physical actions around them-- remain safe and intact. However, about the problems conceivable from the thinking action being material, it must be explained strictly.
2) A case where the thinking action is microscopic. This is likely. However, if this is the case, the fundamental interactions --or, some physical actions around them-- will get involved in trouble. It comes necessary that the framework or mechanism through which they occur (unnaturally) basing on the microscopic thinking action is elucidated.
................
And, though it is not known utterly what the thinking action is concretely, from the foregoing thing, the following things are also known. These are definite.
c) There is some point of contact between the thinking action and matter.
d) The thinking action is physical.
It's because the thinking action interacts with matter in some form by triggering the movement of matter. And, it is because, if there is a point of contact with matter, the thinking action must necessarily be physical.
Therefore, the two things above also come to be the (further) undeniable empirical facts --indirect empirical facts-- (derived from an empirical fact).
《 The quality of consciousness is microscopic -- The work of consciousness is not fulfilled materially (Expectation) 》
The fact that the quality of consciousness is microscopic is equivalent to the fact that the work of consciousness (intelligence) is not fulfilled materially.
(By the way, the work of consciousness consists of the comprehensive work of bodily sensation --the work of observation / information gathering-- and the comprehensive work of thinking --design / computation--).
And , the fact that the work of consciousness is not fulfilled materially means that the work is not fulfilled at the material --macroscopic / external-- facet of a living body such as the brain. Consciousness is microscopic --immaterial--, and the work of sensation and thinking is fulfilled exactly at the immaterial thing of consciousness that emerges superposing upon the brain.
As to the fact that the work of consciousness is not fulfilled materially, please refer also to the section "Consciousness (intelligence) doesn't emerge at the material (external / macroscopic) facet of a living body (Expectation / very important)".
................
It has already been clear that, on both the input side and the output side, consciousness is physical.
However, it has not yet been clear whether the existential mode or the quality of consciousness is material --macroscopic / external-- or microscopic --internal / intangible, difficult to observe or measure, and known ordinary laws of physics are not applicable to--.
And this is an important problem. It's because, if the quality of consciousness is microscopic, a problem around kinetic interactions and the fundamental interactions is expected. It's necessary that consciousness is clearly shown to be material, so that the problem would be evaded.
There are two possibilities.
a) Something material (macroscopic / external) such as the substancce itself called brain, an electromagnetic field generated in the brain, etc. is consciousness. (The quality of consciousness is material)
b) Consciousness emerges superposing upon the brain as a peculiar entity which is separate from material things such as the brain, an electromagnetic field, etc. (The quality of consciousness is microscopic)
................
By the way, usually, some being is demonstrated through showing the . Some being is fully demonstrated if only the being is shown once.
On the other hand, it's impossible to demonstrate that some being doesn't exist. It's because it must be demonstrated that some being doesn't exist anywhere and in any size.
................
And, the question of whether the quality of consciousness is material or microscopic resembles this. It's because, if the quality of consciousness is microscopic, consciousness is intangible, cannot be observed, is the same as not existing, and cannot be demonstrated.
So, as to this question, let's adopt a practical way of searching for consciousness among material things, on the supposition that the quality of consciousness is material. And, if nothing could be consciousness, then an expectation that consciousness would have no choice but to emerge as a microscopic thing will be gained. Fortunately, the place to search is limited. All we have to do for the time being is search only in the brain.
1) What can have the integrateness as a single entity is a quantum only.
In this universe, what can have integrateness as a single entity is a quantum only.
2) The action of the brain is subdivided finely, and various parts of the brain bear those fine actions separately.
From the theory of localization of brain action, the actional brain mapping, etc., it has been known that the action of the brain is subdivided, and indivisual parts bear those fine actions separately.
(However, it's not certain here whether those actions are fulfilled only by the substance called brain or not. Rather, the work of the brain seems to be collaboration between the substance called brain and its consciousness. It seems that if either one was missed, the brain would never work).
3) The brain is not a single quantum and not an integrate thing.
However, no matter how highly organized and layered, the brain as a substnce is a conglomerate of innumerable brain cells and is never a single quantum. And, since the integrateness cannot be worn if it had not been a quantum, it is judged that the substance called brain is not a single integrate thing.
................
And, (the direction of explanation deviates a little, but) this is decisive. It's because the work of bodily sensation and thinking is great, and what fulfills the work must also necessarily great, comprehensive, and integrate.
In other words, it's judged that, only from the fact that a single living body such as the brain is not a integrate body like a quantum, and it doesn't have intergateness and comprehensiveness at the level of substances, the work of sensation and thinking, (which cannot do without comprehensiveness over the whole of a living body), cannot be fulfilled at the facet of the substances itself of a living body such as the brain --the material, macroscopic, and external facet--.
Since the brain is not an integrate body like a quantum, it's impossible that the work of thinking (and sensation) which cannot dispense with great comprehensiveness is fulfilled at the substance itself called brain.
Thinking is not fulfilled at the substance itself called brain.
(For this reason, those work is presumed to be fulfilled exactly at immatter consciousness).
................
4) Consciousness is a big integrate thing.
The action of the brain is subdivided finely, and indivisual parts bear those fine actions separately.
On the other hand, the subjective consciousness can perceive a large number of bodily senses which are taken charge of by a broad area of the brain at the same time. For example, a great deal of data is contained in the sense of sight. Moreover, the amount of information of the sound seems abundant. Furthermore, the subjective consciousness can perceive plural thoughts (senses of thought) too at the same time as well as many bodily sensation. And, a thought is never simple. A thought seems to be formed from a large number of small ideas.
Then, it follows that the subjective consciousness perceives all the numerous senses which occur in innumerable cells of the brain which is not a quantum at the same time. And, it is judged that consciousness is a big integrate thing because it can perform such feats.
Then, it follows that the substance called brain which is not a quantum and integrate thing cannot be consciousness which is judged to be an integrate thing. In a word, the substance itself called brain is not consciousness.
(And, the work of consciousness such as thinking, etc. is not fulfilled at the substance itself called brain.
Then, it follows that consciousness superposes upon the brain in some form.
5) The substance called brain doesn't change into consciousness, and a new substance doesn't appear as consciousness abruptly in the brain.
And consciousness emerges and vanishes. This is an undeniable empirical fact.
And, since consciousness superposes upon the substance called brain, when it emerges, (part of) the substances which constitute the brain do not change into a substance called consciousness all of a sudden. There is no opposite case too. (Part of) the substances of the brain are never chemically converted into a substance of consciousness suddenly.
Moreover, due to the law of the conservation of energy (or, mass), a new substance called consciousness doesn't emerge or vanish all of a sudden in the brain.
The substance called brain doesn't change into consciousness, and a new substance doesn't abruptly emerge as consciousness in the brain.
6) An electromagnetic field is not consciousness.
Furthermore, it is said that, in the brain, an electromagnetic field is generated along with its activity.
However, an electromagnetic field (= photon) is a kind of gauge bosons. And, an electromagnetic field brings electromagnetism among the fundamental interactions (which are the fundamental workings on others). Electromagnetic force appears through the working of an electromagnetic field.
And, each fundamental interaction is the fundamental cause for this universe to move externally, dynamically, and cannot be subdivided into more fine actions. They are indivisible. Each fundamental interaction is never a compound action.
So, it is impossible that an electromagnetic field is consciousness as it is or it have the thinking action too as well as electromagnetism. An electromagnetic field which occurs in the brain is never consciousness.
7) In the brain, there are no macroscopic things other than the substance called the brain and the electromagnetic field which occurs by the activity of the brain.
And, in the brain, there are no macroscopic (material) things other than the substance called the brain and the electromagnetic field which occurs by the activity of the brain.
And, if consciousness emerges in the form of superposing upon the brain, in the situation where the substances and the material things which exist in the brain are not consciousness and there is nothing else which is material, we cannot help judging that consciousness, rather, emerges as a microscopic thing in the brain.
In a word, (the quality of) consciousness is microscopic.
Then, it follows that (the qualities of) the sensing action and the thinking action implemented in consciousness are also microscopic.
(Bodily sensation and senses of thought are like shadows of the movements of the bodily sensing action and the thinking action, and are not transmitted between plural entities --for example, a substance called brain and the consciousness--. It's not possible. So, if they are felt by consciousness, the actions which bring them must be implemented in consciousness).
From the above, it is conjectured that consciousness is a queer thing which emerges as a single integrate entity of which quality is microscopic in a way of superposing upon the conglomerate of innumerable brain cells (substances).
The (material) brain cells do not (materially and) chemically bond with each other and form a big quantum. In spite of it, if consciousness emerges as an integrate thing in a way of superposing upon the whole, it is conjectured that it is like a peculiar quantum which became free of materiality. If it is such a thing, it may emerge without chemical bonds of base substances when some physical conditions are met. (This doesn't conform to the traditional concept of quanta. It might become a new kind of quantum).
If the explanation of the reasons is omitted, the gist comes as follows.
The brain is a conglomerate of innumerable brain cells and not an integrate thing like a quantum. So, the substance itself called brain cannot be consciousness which is integrate. Moreover, the electromagnetic field generated in the brain brings the electromagnetic interaction which is one of the fundamental interactions, and cannot be consciousness. Furthermore, there is neither a fact that (parts of) the substance of a brain changes into consciousness, nor a fact that a new substance appears as consciousness suddenly in the brain. And, there is nothing material (macroscopic) other than the substance called brain and the electromagnetic field. Then, it is judged that consciousness emerges in the brain as a peculiar thing which is not material. Therefore, (the quality of) consciousness is microscopic.
(And, the work of consciousness such as thinking, etc. is not fulfilled at the substance itself called brain.
By the bye, by the examination so far, it became almost certain that (the quality of) consciousness is microscopic. So, it seems that the problem expected around kinetic interactions and the fundamental interactions cannot be avoided. Details are described separately.
