Consciousness Decoded
by Timothy Tang

Many have the belief that the mind is greatly superior to the computer, it can possess capabilities that the computer would not. Many instances of computer hardware and software failures did not help much in the notions that people already had of computers. As many people have already experienced many frustrations associated with computer usage, it is no surprise that the idea that the human mind could possess similar weaknesses to the computer would seem to be unpopular to the general masses.

It is indeed human nature to reject the facing of one's own weaknesses, more so for the statements that the human mind could share failures and weaknesses of the computer, that the mind could afterall just be an empty box with a simple circuit board, posessing nothing special that defines us as sentient human beings. If people would not come to terms that the mind and body could have their weaknesses and imperfections, but forever be adamant to facing the truth, they would never be able to realise the true nature of what makes us all imperfectly human.

I believe the main problem of human-computer comparison lies in a perception problem that is going on in the opposite direction. It should be reminded that ultimately, the computer is after all made in the model of the human mind and not in the other way round. If people would correct their old perception of the mind-computer comparison, they would view the computer as being a simple evolving model of the human mind. And any mechanisms found in the mind which is similar to that found in the average computer, would not automatically be viewed as being simplistic, primitive and lifeless.


Before I explain

Before I begin to explain consciousness in this document, I will define its meaning in a short sentence. The word "consciousness" as defined by me, is the mind's on-going awareness and interpretation of its existence, its relationship and interaction of the mind and its immediate environment.

Since the phenomenal of consciousness is more than the sum of its parts, it would not be very logical to assume that the value of consciousness should be mathematically divided among them, and be judged accordingly so. Rather, every part has its own unique value and contribute in different ways to the wholesome phenomenal of consciousness. If a small part of a large mechanism does not fulfill the entire mechanism's functions, it is not always logical to automatically assume that the small part does not belong in its place, nor would it not contribute to the entire mechanism's functions.

I will leave out the discussions of consciousness research done by many other researchers and go right into explaining my research results. I will also explain how the mechanisms of consciousness can provide insights to many problems frequently associated with absence or deficiency of consciousness.


The IFIAM algorithm of consciousness

From my research in consciousness, I have discovered a mental mechanism responsible for the phenomenal experience of consciousness. Specifically, this mental mechanism uses an evolutionary algorithm to bring forth consciousness. In mathematics and computing, an algorithm is defined as an operation that uses a set of well-defined instructions to accomplish a task which will terminate after its completion.

This evolutionary algorithm for consciousness as defined by me is the IFIAM, the acronym meaning Identity Formulating, Identification, and Assigning Mechanism. I sometimes write it as "IFIAMechanism". I am still in the on-going research to determine whether this algorithm has its reaches in the molecular or quantum level, rather than just on the much bigger macro level.

The IFIAM is part of a complex fractal algorithmic process to generate consciousness. It also has both encoding and decoding functions. A single-level operation of the IFIAM is not sufficient for consciousness, rather it requires many iterations and higher fractal levels supported by the brain's parallel computing abilities, in order to generate a deeply rich and informative consciousness.



Introduction

The meaning and explanation of consciousness has been said to be undefineable for thousands of years in the history of mankind. As of today, this statement shall no longer be true for my research has successfully decoded its profound mysteries. As I write out my explanation of consciousness in this text document and in many others, I will display to everyone the structure and mechanisms that supports it and causes it to come into being.

I first came across the subject of consciousness in the summer of 2004, one and a half years after I began a research project on codes. At that point of time, consciousness was said to be a very popular mystery that many scientists and philosophers were trying their best to solve. The problem of consciousness first appeared to me as a very interesting and challenging problem to attempt. Since my previous research on codes had then ended, I had much time to join many other truth-seekers in the quest to find out more about this mysterious phenomenon called "consciousness".

One and a half years later after researching consciousness in the autumn of 2005, my research of consciousness finally convinced me that the problem of consciousness has been successfully "decoded" and understood sufficiently enough for it to be no longer deem a mystery. But I was very skeptical that I could so easily understand its mysterious workings whereas others were still in the frustrating process of solving the millenia-old problem. Being unconvinced myself, I took months and months to test my research results with a series of thorough tests to examine its logic and compatibility with other well-established sciences.

And now in the summer of 2006, two years after I came across the "problem" of consciousness and began its research, I am posting my research results in word documents on the Internet for everyone to download and view. I hope by doing so, many other scientists can further scrutinise and examine my hypotheses/theories against their own series of tests. The rich, wholesome properties of good consciousness truly involves explanations from multiple disciplines of science.

Originally, my venture into consciousness research was to fully discover how consciousness really works so that I could in turn share the research results with the people I truly love and care about, that they in turn could enhance their consciousness and better adapt in this world.

Do remember to leave all your assumptions and skepticisms of consciousness at the door before proceeding, cause the first rule to seek any truth is to assume absolutely nothing.

Correcting a false notion of the mind and computers

It is quite well observed that many people seem to have a great phobia or unwillingness to compare the mind to a computer. Perhaps it is the perception that the human mind would be viewed as being simplistic and primitive if it has any real relations to a circuit board and processor inside a box. Also, perhaps people are afraid to go face to face with the idea that if the mysterious workings of the mind can be simplified and observed, the mysterious essence of what makes up the uniqueness of a person would gradually fade away as well.

I feel that for people to make such a deduction presents a great error in their logic and thinking process, they have actually created many false notions in the human-computer comparison. Allow me to present a new perception.

As computers became prominent in the later part of the 20th century, people became more accustomed to include computers to assist in their daily lives. As neuroscience progressed, people became more aware of the inner workings of the mind, along with the emergence of reports highlighting similarities of the mind and computer. But people have always had the IFIAM's operations could lead to different states or levels of consciousness. Consciousness does not only require the IFIAM, it also requires many other algorithmic mechanisms, such as the mechanism for time perception for instance, until the output condition for the many richly complex levels and states of consciousness is obtained.

The IFIAM is truly an amazing algorithm, I can even use the basic algorithmic steps to consciously increase my level of consciousness. Who knows the real depth it could reach down to the molecular or even quantum level? I believe the IFIAM could be part of the explanatory gap that explains consciousness.


Explanation for the basic steps of the IFIAM algorithm in the macro conscious level

The full terms as represented by initials of the IFIAM reveals the instructional steps of the basic algorithm in the macro conscious level to activate consciousness. I will simply explain it in natural language.

1. First stage, the initial formulation of the identities of thoughts or physical objects based on schemata memory.

2. Second stage, the pre-formulated identities are identified by matches of schematas from memory.

3. Third stage, additional information from schemata memory are assigned to the second-stage identities. They are then related to other identities based on space and time proximity. This contributes to binding, form and pattern recognitions.

The IFIAM works much in similarity to the hard disk drive during the defragmentation program.

Disclaimer: Please note that the IFIAM algorithm is not a rigorously well-defined operation, for there are many sub-algorithms present within each basic step. This is what makes the formulation of consciousness truly complex and mysterious. It would be quite impossible to write out the algorithm in full programming language, since there are still many unknowns present in it. The workings of the IFIAM in the molecular or possibly quantum level are still unknown.


The IFIAM requires a query condition to activate and sustain consciousness

The IFIAM cannot work without a function to define its purpose, since to activate and sustain consciousness for long periods of time requires large amounts of glucose and oxygen. To activate high levels of consciousness without a good function or purpose would waste away much of the body's energy resources and could pose a problem to the body's survival. Therefore requiring a function or reason to activate the IFIAM is a failsafe to prevent unnecessary wastage of the body's energy resources.

I have discovered that to activate the algorithm to bring forth consciousness to actually consist of a "query condition" as in the context of computing.

For example, in the morning when a person has just awaken from sleep, it requires a good reason to increase one's consciousness level to get out of bed, whether to go to the bathroom or to go out to work or school. The query condition would be either, "Does my bladder require emptying?" or "Is it time to prepare myself for work or school?". And the query condition would require selections of "THEN" or "ELSE" choices. So for instance if the query condition would be "Does my bladder require emptying?", it would lead to the selections of "'THEN' increase consciousness level by using IFIAM algorithm to assist one to make the way to the bathroom", or "'ELSE' I will remain in bed".

The query condition for the IFIAM could also be used for the dealing of threats from one's environment. I believe the algorithm has evolutionary roots which go back to the early days when man had to uitilise his consciousness to deal and adapt to the threats around him.

So the query condition for the activation of the IFIAM to deal with perceived threats could be like,

IF(mind detects visual and sensory anomaly in environment), THEN(use IFIAM to increase level of consciousness to formulate the identities in environment to source out threat identities and adapt), ELSE(suppress activation of consciousness of environment to prevent activation of emotional fear that could lead to own physical movement that could agitate the source of threat).

A familiar example would be the instances whereby people who have just awaken from their unconsciousness and questioning to themselves and to others of "where am I?". Or the person would be asked of what is his name, "What is my name?", "How many fingers do I have?".

These are all queries to test whether consciousness in the person is functioning well.


The macro workings of the IFIAM algorithm in action

One of the wonders of the IFIAM algorithm is that the single basic steps of the algorithm can be consciously executed by the mind. An example is the recognition of a person. When one sees a human figure of a known friend, one formulates the figure and identifies it with the mind's schemata memory. Additional information are then assigned to the figure's identity from schemata memory. It is then matched in the mind's database of all the known identities based on probability. Sufficient operations of the IFIAM would increase the certainty in the mind of the successful match. For instance, if the operations of the IFIAM are not sufficient or complete, the image of the person would not be formulated well enough to be recognizable. One may just mistake the person's basic form as that of a little tree.

When a person wakes up from sleep, the first thoughts that are probably going through the person's mind are probably queries that try to formulate the body's orientation in relation to his environment. The queries could be such as "Where am I?", "What am I doing here?", "how did I get here?" and so on. The IFIAM along with the body's physical senses would then be used to increase the level of consciousness in order to prepare the mind to adapt to the physical environment.


The IFIAM and Neuroscience

I am still in the process of determining whether the IFIAM algorithm exhibits any influence in the molecular level of the brain. If it really does so, then anesthesia in surgery can be better understood. It could later have the explanation that the molecules of anesthetics disables/relaxes the individual physical structures that supports the IFIAM, thereby separating apart the steps of the IFIAM's algorithms, preventing the algorithm from executing its program, which would lead to the prevention of the activation of consciousness in the brain. However this is still only a hypothesis of mine, it is yet to be confirmed by scientific tests.

Also, if the IFIAM and its working algorithm have their reaches in the molecular or even in the quantum level, it could have a sufficient basis to explain the binding problem often exclaimed by philosophers.


Malfunction or deficiency of the IFIAM's operations

I believe the IFIAM could also explain the problems of Blindsight and Capgras syndrome. In the case of Capgras syndrome, the malfunctions in the parts of the brain that makes up the IFIAMechanism could limit the operations of the IFIAM algorithm which limits the mind to fully generate and confirm the fully real identities of people.

I strongly believe that the malfunctions or deficiencies of the IFIAMechanism in the brain is a good cause for psychiatric patients to experience visual, physical and auditory hallucinations. The causes could be an abnormal activation of the IFIAMechanism in addition to a physical malfunction in the IFIAMechanism along with its algorithmic process to overly access schemata memory, leading to creation of artificial and abnormal identities in the mental representation in the brain without much conscious control.


The IFIAM and dreams

Although visual hallucinations are deemed anomalies in the awakened state of the mind, such "anomalies" are common in sleep when parts of the neural network of the brain shut down. Dreams I believe, are caused by the mind's suppressed needs to formulate identities in a non-distracting environment such as in sleep or in clear thoughts, of identities that have been earlier suppressed when the IFIAM has experienced too great a workload and distractions to function normally.

A good example of when the IFIAM is in the freshest state is the period when a person has just woken up from sleep. If he returns back to sleep again, the IFIAM would be able to efficiently generate many vividly false images and identities of objects and people based on partially accessing a partially functional schemata memory network.

A good analogy of what the brain is doing during dream creation is the data-seeking operations of a hard disk drive when many data clusters are non-accessible. The data accessed from the hard disk would be mostly incomplete and "corrupted". The data accessed would not be assembled properly and one gets gibberish such as in a text document. This is similar to what happens in the dreaming state.


The acronym of the IFIAM

It is definitely strange that in the course of discovering the IFIAMechanism, I noticed that the acronym of the IFIAM could be read out as "if I am". This statement would obviously constitute as an "IF" along with a "condition" in programming language, which would require the selection of "THEN" or "ELSE" outcomes to fulfill a certain condition, the condition being the "I am". Initially, I came up with only the steps of IFIM, but later realise the missing assigning step in the algorithm would more accurately describe the entire operation. This occurence could be taken as being purely coincidental and meaningless, something as reading between the lines. Otherwise, I was quite strucked as to what the conditional statement could really imply in relation to consciousness, if it meant anything in the first place. Would consciousness be part of a larger missing program? We shall see.


My experience with the IFIAM

It is through the IFIAMechanism that I have managed to train and significantly enhance my levels of consciousness. I have managed to manipulate my consciousness, to step up and down the level of intensity, by altering how much input is entered into the algorithm. The fractal processes of the IFIAM uses up much oxygen and glucose from the body. By being able to exert some control over my states of consciousness, my mind is thus able to better manage the consumption of glucose and oxygen in the brain, thereby being more efficient in managing the body's energy resources. Having very much control in the mental foundation has also effects in stablising other mental processes. This IFIAM algorithm is certainly very real and has a great existence in the brain. My significantly enhanced consciousness is a very good and real proof.

Consciousness' rates of change

Consciousness is the mind's on-going awareness and interpretation of its existence, its relationship and interaction of the mind and its immediate environment. Consciousness is the mind's on-going awareness and interpretation of change in its environment. A person who does not interpret change cannot be conscious.

If we could measure the IFIAMechanism's algorithmic rate of change against the constant flow of time, we would be able to plot a curve on a graph. And we would have the derivative and the integral of Calculus mathematics. We would be able to see how fast the level of consciousness is increasing, as well as measure the amount of increase over a period of time.

We have sufficient mathematics to measure consciousness, we now only require the sufficient technology to detect the fractal expansions and pressures in the brain to "measure" consciousness within the range of a few hundred milliseconds.

One of the IFIAM's abilities and functions is to detect or feel its own rates of change. This contributes in motion and speed detection of objects in the environment. This is significant in early man's quests for survival in prehistoric times. If early man were not able to detect the movements of threats in his environment, he would not be able to adequately adapt to them and survive. Even calculus was employed by him, he had to calculate how fast a wild animal was increasing its rate of speed in order to avoid it as a defense or to catch up to it during hunting. When two objects such as a wild animal and the primal man have both varying rates of change in their running speeds, we would have related rates of Calculus.

The level of consciousness has to be increased fast enough in order for a person to be aware of his environment, so that he could detect the embedded threats quickly and adapt to it. How fast the level of consciousness has to be increased is dependent on how immediate the threats are. So we would have related rates of how fast the threats will present a danger to the person and how fast consciousness has to be increased to deal with it. If a person can increase his consciousness of the threats fast enough and adapt to them, he is likely to survive. Otherwise, he may not have a good chance of survival.


Blindsight

I believe the problem of Blindsight is related to the IFIAM. The brain creates a mental visual representation of one's environment in the mind. If a spot in the brain which is responsible for the generation of the mental representation is damaged or disrupted and affects the operations of the IFIAMechanisms within the spot, the IFIAM network would not be able to formulate the full identities in the affected visual range, leading to visual blindness in the particular spot. But the person can still guess with high accuracy of the colors or the form of an object presented in the blind visual range. The IFIAMs in the damaged spot might be able to formulate objects and identify colors, but the greatly severed links of the IFIAMechanisms in the damaged apot would not be able to have sufficient connections to other IFIAMs networks in other parts of the brain in order to bring the sensory stimuli in the blindspot into full visual consciousness. The person would only have a good "intuition" of guessing the forms and colors of objects in the blind visual range with great accuracy.


The intuitions of consciousness

I believe the intuitions of consciousness are due to the IFIAMechanism of not generating high enough levels of consciousness to bring forth fully conscious thoughts. The low levels of consciousness generated by the IFIAM might be due to insufficient formulated identities that would bridge the gaps between the fractal networks to create a complex "web" which will bring forth the fully formulated and conscious identities of the thought.

This problem is also similar to those in accessing and formulating long and short-term memories. If a person would not be able to bridge the fractal links in the brain, the memories cannot be fully accessed.


The "vagueness" of consciousness

The characteristics of the IFIAMechanism and its algorithm are similar to the laws of mathematics and physics, you do not see them working right before your very eyes, but they still very much exist in the physical world and have tremendous influences. The laws of mathematics and physics have always been all around us in our world, they simply require languages of numbers and symbols for people to recognise and interact with them. In the example of a World Cup soccer game, soccer players have to calculate their rates in running accelerations to catch up with another soccer player of the opposite team holding onto the ball. And then there is the ball's trajectory and flight curve a good soccer player like David Beckham have to consider in order to score a successful goal. It might just have been a simple soccer match to many people but if one examines closely, one would realise that much Calculus mathematics and physics are involved.

If a person do not see and recognise the complex Calculus equations represented in a soccer match, it does not simply mean that Calculus mathematics is non-existant in the Universe.

Consciousness requires a vocabularly in order for its characteristics and properties to be well-described and recognised. Unless one is familiar with its assigned vocabularly, one would not be able to understand, recognise and interact with it.

People have often made the mistake of trying to observe the workings of consciousness by freezing one's thoughts. By doing so, one inevitably slows down the mind's interpretations of the physical environment, slowing down the operations of the IFIAMechanism down to a point where little changes in consciousness are perceived. A person inevitably slow down, interfere and diminish the workings of consciousness simply by trying to observe it.


The IFIAM fractal network

The consciousness algorithm of the IFIAM is part of a larger fractal algorithm, meaning the IFIAMechanism is spreaded widely throughout the brain's neural network like fractals. When consciousness is activated through the IFIAMechanism, the operations are executed almost simultaneously throughtout the numerous fractal networks in the brain. The operations of the IFIAM algorithm are expanded exponentially thoughout the fractal networks supported by the brain's parallel computing capabilities. As the numerous fractals of the IFIAMechanism create links to one another, the level of consciousness subsequently increases. This creates a fast exponential rate of change in consciousness expansion. So a person staring at an object to decode its properties would take an average of a few hundred milliseconds for the operations of the IFIAM to complete its decoding work.


Consciousness and anesthetics

The expansion level of consciousness is dependent on the numerous fractal networks in the brain to perform linkages with one another. When this has taken place, the level of consciousness in the mind will increase. This is the reason why anesthetics have to be delivered thoughtout the entire brain, to ensure that the brain-wide IFIAMechanisms are all disabled and relaxed. This is to make sure that the fractal web networks of consciousness will not be constructed as a base for consciousness to occur.onstructed in their entirety.

A very nice example of using intuition generated by a low level of consciousness is on a tennis court in a tournament. If the tennis player Venus Williams hits a very fast serve of over a hundred miles an hour to the opposite player which could be her sister Serena Williams. Serena would not have the sufficient few hundred milliseconds to be able to increase her consciousness level to be fully conscious of the moving tennis ball. Instead, she would have no choice but to estimate the trajectory and location of the ball based on Calculus' rates of change and also based on her "intuition", which is generated by a low level of consciousness. If she is successful in her ability to instantaneously generate a low level of consciousness to be aware of the ball by formulating its identity, calculate its movement and curving trajectory, and be adaptive enough to position her body to reach the ball, there is a very good chance of her returning the serve. If she is slow in any of the three crucial conditions, she might miss hitting the ball altogether and Venus would have scored an ace.


Consciousness and time perception

The mechanism of consciousness is linked to the mechanism of time perception in the brain. The mechanism for time perception is very crucial for early man's survival in his environment. If he was not able to keep track of time, his timing would be out of sync and he would not have been able to keep up with the movements in his environment such as those of threats.

Time perception is based on the timing mechanism in the brain. For instance, if there is an object that needs to be kept in track of its movement such as that of a threatening body of a wild animal, the timing mechanism in the brain is activated after the IFIAM has formulated its identity and recognised it as a threatening source. The movement of time would then seem to be moving very slow due to the expansion of time awareness. The enhanced time awareness is to assist the mind to keep up with the threatening movements so that the person can adapt quickly should there be any immediate threat forces that would pose a great danger.

If an object in a person's environment is deemed to be non-threatening and its presence and physical movement do not require the timing mechanism to keep track of them, the person would not be well conscious of the object. If almost all of the identities in a person's physical environment has been deemed to be non-threatening and does not require the timing mechanism to keep track of their presence and movements, the person would not be conscious of the passing of time. This would cause him to feel that time is passing very quickly in the instances that he updates himself on the actual time.

If the mind's IFIAM is not distracted by interesting or exciting thoughts and feelings, such as those caused by listening to music or watching a movie, a person would have nothing to keep his mind thinking and distracted enough from perceiving the slow passing of time in his environment. This might cause him to experience the sensations of boredom.

Hi my name is Timothy Tang and I would like to mention that I am the person who wrote the sum of texts about my theory of consciousness titled "Consciousness Decoded" in the original post of this topic but I did not create and post this topic. The posted texts here are actually a little scrambled.

Feel free to visit the Consciousness Decoded blog at http://consciousnessdecoded.blogspot.com to view the correct original documents and for further parts of my theory.

reminds me of Dennett's "Consciousness Explained". Both make some interesting observations in spite of their failure to explain or decode consciousness.

May I know what of consciousness do you wish to be explained?

Your limiting your perception by too much comparison between the mind to computers, there are hundreds of possible variations and comparisons upon which one can evaluate.

Time Perception is actually a unconcious action, time in itself is controlled by the sub-concious, I know this because of Coopers final evaluations in the attempt to manipulate time conciously and had only failures upon which he came to the conclusion that time must be manipulated and percieved on the sub-concious level.

Achieving "higher" levels of conciousness is easily mistaken by connecting with your sub-concious on a greater level. When you make this connection you can modify your biological clock, perception, speed, strength, heartbeat, lung capacity, left and right brain stimulation, ect. Besides, what is "higher", it is subjective to ones own perception, to go up in one perception is to go down in another.

For starters, answering the hard problems of consciousness

Please explain the following four properties of consciousness:

1. Spacelessness. Consciousness has no location in physical space.

2. Timelessness. Consciousness has no time dimension. It is alway "now" to the consciousness.

3. Unity. Consciousness is unified (not fragmented), although the many locations in the brain that have increased activity as consciousness changes are spatially disparate.

4. Privacy. Consciousness cannot be observed, it is observation.

Additionally, please account for the following two observations about consciousness:

1. Why does consciousness seem to play such a strong role in memory formation? No memory can be formed that was not first in consciousness. This implies that (philosopher's) zombies can't learn.

2. How/why does consciousness have a role in will? Pain reflex motion does not require consciousness, and if an athlete becomes self-conscious on the field, he "chokes" and flubs his actions. However, consciousness seems required for critical activities like driving, speaking, and composing at the keyboard.

good questions Rick.

So, you only just wish to know why perception is accompanied with the bonus of experience? If this is the case, I believe I have an answer to that but give me a day or two to write it out.

For the other questions posed by other forumers, I'll get to them after I finish answering this question.

I would like to know why I perceive red as such and not as green. Why is there not the experience of color inversion? What is the precise relation between neural activity and the qualities of conscious experience (such as the redness of red)?

I'm glad you liked them, Dianah. Those are questions that I have been wondering about for a long time.

I believe I have answered both lucid_dream and cerebral's questions.



Why is perception accompanied by subjective experience?


The early days

In the early days of primal man, his senses were diverted to the primary function to identify threat identities in his environment. Plants like poisonous mushrooms and venomous snakes with striking colors such as bright red and yellow would often bring forth the messages of their poisonous nature to hungry creatures. The high wave-length intensity predominant in striking colors often accompanies a message that of a highly threatening nature.

Predators on the other hand did not require very much of a threatening facade as a defence, their reputable deadly strength and agility to kill were good enough as a serious stay-off warning. They would not be very successful hunters if they had colourful physical exteriors that attract attention.

Along with time, man and nature have both evolved in their defence and adapting strategies to survive. The identities/properties in the environment have changed to a more complex nature. And the brain and mind of man adapted to interpreting a more complex and rich modern environment. The IFIAMechanism evolved to its present state to cope with the increasing demands of the brain.


Modern times

The sensory stimuli from matter in the physical world transmitted to the mind through the medium of light or sound are composed of energy wave-lengths.

I use the example of the perception of the color red and the resultant subjective experience.

The wave-length of the color red is about 600-700 nanometres depending on the color intensity.

Sensory energies are prompting cues to activate the IFIAMechanism to decode their properties through its algorithmic operations.

A living body without a medium of a nervous system for sensory energy to be received by the IFIAMechanism in the mind, would not be able to be prompted into activation to decode sensory information. States of consciousness then cannot be achieved.

Sensory energies, depending on their intensities, would prompt the IFIAMechanism in different ways. A high wave-length intensity input of the color red in the range of 600-700 nm would stimulate the IFIAMechanism in a different way as to the color green with a lower wave-length intensity of about 500 nm. The output from the processing of the color red would have a higher intensity to the color green.

The IFIAMechanism is not perfect, it operates differently in everyone and is easily subjectable to operating failures. The operations of the IFIAMechanism can be altered such as in the case of anesthesia or the consumption of mind-altering drugs which could lead to out-of-body experiences or altered states of consciousness.

Every person's IFIAMechanism and its operations are different and unique, which is the reason why there is subjective experience of sensory stimuli processed. What is deep in red to a person may be experienced as normal red to another person with a less efficient or sensitive IFIAMechanism.

The raw unsorted wave-length energies are the input prompting cues to trigger activate the IFIAMechanism to decode the properties of the sensory stimulus. As a person stares at the stimulus source of the color red, the brain-wide fractal networks of the IFIAMechanism are formed to interpret the properties of the color red. After sufficient complex fractal networks have been formed and linked together, along with sufficient high-level operations of the IFIAM algorithm, perception of the color red in consciousness is achieved after a few hundred milliseconds. After the IFIAMechanism has sorted out and decoded the properties of the sensory stimulus, the residual output is then exited as subjective conscious experience.

Remember that a person could react emotionally to the unique output generated by the IFIAMechanism resulting in a subjective "feeling" of seeing red.

This subjective experience and its decoded identities/properties within are crucial for the mind to determine its following courses of action after the perception and experience of the color red.

The subjective perception and experience is not only an intelligence report of the subject's identities/properties but also makes up a query condition to lead to a next stage in consciousness stream. A stream of consciousness has to be sustained by a string of queries. A subjective feeling experience is therefore one of the variables of the query condition to lead the mind to different courses of action.

For example, IF(the conscious experience of the color red been interpreted and experienced), THEN(run away as the color red presents warning properties), ELSE(execute non-evasive perceiving and experiencing action as color red does not signify warning properties).

Utilising emotional states as query conditions allows for a greater number of THEN and ELSE branches, it allows and leads to a greater number of choices and action outcomes.

Subjective experience leads to every person's unique interpretation of his sensory environment. The unique interpretation of people's IFIAMechanism of their sensory environment leads to their unique formulation of choices in their daily courses of action. Subjective experience is a crucial intelligence for a person to adapt to his environment and is also a condition of a query to sustain consciousness.

Different feeling experiences of the subjective nature is a necessity to lead the mind to different paths. Otherwise people would all feel the same way which would lead them to do very similar actions. Nobody would then be unique.



Any further queries about this topic?

I don't see the comparison between mind and computers to be an inferior choice? How could comparing the mind to computers be limiting my perception? Do explain further.



Time perception could partly be controlled by the unconscious, but it could also be controlled consciously to some degrees, if one has the know-how and sufficient training in the area.



Do rephrase your points. My definition of higher levels of consciousness is not related to the awareness of the body's autonomic functions and to control them.

But referring to "algorithmic operations" of the IFIAMechanism does not answer my question of the exact relation between neural activities and subjective experience. Why precisely is my experience of the color red associated with a particular pattern of neural activations and not others?

Consciousness has a physical location in the networks of the brain.




The mental representation of the physical Self and the mental representation of its environment in the brain are generated at about the same time of a few hundred milliseconds. Therefore they co-exist and interact with each other seemingly in the present "now".




The brain's fractal networks function in parallel processes and has parallel connections, rather than in serial. This parallel connectivity enables aspects of consciousness to be unified and maintain its integrity rather than be fragmented and misplaced.




A person's consciousness is sustained and generated by his own unique mechanism to achieve his unique consciousness. A person's unique consciousness cannot be generated by another person's mechanism because their mechanisms are different and incompatible.




The IFIAMechanism has to be activated to encode memory and it is only activated when the mind is experiencing consciousness. Philosopher's zombies are not conscious and they certainly cannot learn.




Consciousness generates query conditions to the mind to choose the next course of action. If an athlete becomes too self-conscious of his own performance, he generates too many query conditions that gets in the way of his automaticity of his performance. An example is the athlete querying himself of, "IF(I feel like this right now running on the track)", this would cause him to react somehow to his distracting experience, getting in the way of the flow of his performance. Being too self-conscious will only get in the way of automaticity.

I rather suspect that I would use subconciousness rather than automaticity that you use.
We like to think that conscious thoughts control many of our actions, but the training and repetitive nature of actions undertaken lead to subconscious 'takeover' of control (which can easily be made less effective if conscious thought kicks in).
I have witnessed this effect in my own experience on many occasions.
A particular objective may be achievable: subconcious enactment often ensures success, whereas conscious attempts will fail.

The fractal networks to generate consciousness in everyone's brain are unique. Everybody's brain progresses differently and the particular pattern of neuronal activations associated with the color red could have been allocated during a specific progression of your brain in early years of brain development.

Ok, then why do particular patterns of neuronal activations get associated with particular subjective experiences?

You are questioning about the nature of Nature, something that currently only Nature has the answer. I have never given this much thought before but I'll get back to you once I have the answer.

Okay looks like ive got a bit of ground to cover..

First of all what I mean by one persons perception of up is another persons perception of down is referring to the fact that people do not percieve things in the same way. Theirfore how can one be sure that they are achieving a higher level of consciousness, you could in fact be lowering your consciousness depending on how you percieve higher and lower levels of consciousness.

Secondly, no you cannot control time through the conscious, Coopers final findings clearly state that they found no evidence whatsoever that time could be manipulated by the conscious. By the way Cooper was the discoverer of time distortion and manipulating the internal clock, Cooper and Milton desperatly tried to find any way to control time consciously but they found no evidence it was possible.

You are limiting your perception of the situation by comparing minds to computers, it is very simple really. You are taking a computer and comparing it to the mind, first of all the micro processor of a computer is not similar to the neural network of the mind, there is a special set of processors that do attempt to mimic the neural network of the brain through silicon acting as neurons. The fact of the matter is that you have only compared one thing, the mind to a computer, why not make comparisons to quantum mechanics and neurobiology? there are endless comparisons to be made. You have only looked at one thing and presumed you have found the answers, the fact is you have made a simple comparison between two entities and made presumptions without further extrapolating your findings.



Sigh* and how is it you know that the conscious does not simply percieve the existance of the brain in order to fufill its own ego that it exists in a world it created?



Miliseconds are non-existant, they are a human creation. Normally used for the perception of changes within a environment.


Your referring to the internal network of the brain, not the way consciousness functions.


Tests have shown it is possible to change a perception entirely through deep hypnosis identification, where the person identifies themself as another person, possibly even one who exists in "reality". Through enough history and amnesia of the previous perception, the conscious can readily identify itself as a diffrent person entirely.



Consciousness serves as a protector for the sub-conscious. The sub-conscious readily accepts any suggestions or orders, the consciousness is the filter that decides what orders to accept and what to decline, this is the primary purpose of the consciousness' role in the brain. This is also the basis for all subliminal suggestion, ect. The goal with it is to bypass the consciousness in some way and get to the more obident sub-conscious.

So Timothy, are you saying that if no query conditions are generated, consciousness is not possible? What do you think is so special about query conditions that implicates them with consciousness? Granted, it's an interesting idea but it needs to be further worked out.

I have serious doubts about your theory, though. First, the IFIAM algorithm you describe above is not a real algorithm. It's an incomplete and coarse description of pattern recognition. As such, there is nothing special about IFIAM. The importance of pattern recognition in the brain has been around for ages. I see no reason to christen it with the name 'IFIAM'.

Second, consciousness is not just about pattern recognition, and you have failed to explain anything about consciousness besides making some analogies with a computer (and these analogies have been around since computers first came out).

That being said, I fail to fully see what there is that's novel in your essay above. I think you have grossly underestimated and/or misunderstand the problems of consciousness. Your essay is interesting but almost amounts to sophistry since you are making claims you cannot back up. I doubt you're intentionally employing sophistry; more likely you're just naive and haven't fully reflected on the problems of consciousness. Like you noted, many of the problems of consciousness have remained unsolved for millenia....
.
...There is a reason for that. Don't be so presumptuous.

To maximus242:

Allow me to be very frank with you, and tell you something that perhaps other people did not do so out of their kindness. Hope you take no offence with what I am going to say.

I encourage you to read up more and cover more groundwork in the areas of Cognitive Science and all its related disciplines. It seems like you have a seemingly weak and insufficient grasp and knowledge of the brain and how the mind works based on your limited vocabularly to explain yourself. If a person is unfamiliar with the multiple disciplines related to consciousness, he would not be able to venture very far in a complicated subject such as consciousness but will be very prone to making lots of assumptions and pre-judgment based on his limited knowledge and understanding.


To lucid_dream:

I have barely begun to explain my theory of consciousness so do be patient and avoid pre-judging the theory by the sum of its parts. I actually did say something similar in the introduction part of my theory.

I quote, "Since the phenomenal of consciousness is more than the sum of its parts, it would not be very logical to assume that the value of consciousness should be mathematically divided among them, and be judged accordingly so".

I have yet to fully explain consciousness, I am only in the second part of the explanations of my theory.

Did I grossly underestimate and/or misunderstood the problems of consciousness but is simply naive and haven't fully reflected on the problems of consciousness?

I guess only I would have the answer to that since "consciousness cannot be observed" by a person other than the person himself and that includes perception. How do you know how it feels like to be me and how I think?




What reasons could they be? Or are you presuming that there must definitely be a good reason? It seems like you are telling others not to be presumptous when you are commiting the same error, by implying that consciousness cannot be easily explained because no one else has done so in the past, therefore highly unlikely to be explained now or in the future.


Maximus242 and lucid_dream, I would like to go on and discuss my theory with the two of you but right now I have to concentrate on writing out the explanations for the rest of my theory. This forum is only one of the many stops I made on the Internet. Time is really short. I encourage everyone to check on my blog website for future documents to be posted. Thank you.

I will. Thanks!

Timothy, I'm not trying to be too hard on you. I've spent a lot of time reading about what others had to say about consciousness, and now spend a lot of time thinking about it myself, in my own terms and based on my own experience. It's still a complete mystery to me. Determining certain computational aspects underlying consciousness does not tell us why we have consciousness nor why we experience consciousness in one way but not another for a given set of neural activations. It's similar to trying to determine why the speed of light is 299,792,458 m/s instead of 299,792,457 or 299,792,459 m/s. Why do we experience red in the way that we do? The mapping between neural activation patterns and subjective experience seems arbitrary, and since their are infinite such mappings, it would seem to imply that Nature is infinitely arbitrary, which I do not accept. Your theory does not address this issue. Maybe it wasn't meant to. I still think it's interesting, but the limits of your theory should probably be more clearly spelled out. That is, your theory is addressing certain computational aspects underlying consciousness but is not addressing the mapping between neural activation patterns and subjective experience.

Really? sounds like your just avoiding my statement if your algorithm is so important, then why are you posting it on the internet? why am I not seeing it recognized by the scientific community? For something so important as decoding the foundations of consciousness there seems to be a lack of recognition, hell if it really is what you say it is, someone on Brain Meta should of already posted it. Why are you going around posting this, shouldnt there be news articles or at least scientific journals doing articles about this algorithm? Also if you are going to question my understanding about cognitive science then I would expect you to post something more in depth about your algorithm rather than throw a brief summary and expect me to provide a indepth look at something that is very incomplete.

Dear Timothy,

Very interesting indeed.

I have several important questions:

1) Do you consider possibility that while thinking a man possibly may acquire information from outside as well, by a way yet unknown? I mean do you consider real possibility that a part of man’s consciousness can be “located” outside of his brain?

2) Have you considered Synchrony related ideas and experiments reported by Dr. Carl G. Yung?

3) What do you think about Shared Consciousness?