A concept paper that uses a heuristic approach to investigate the consciousness present in matter at the atomic and molecular level. Ravi Shankar
Abstract
The measurement of the physical properties of any entity is fundamental to science. Without such measured attributes, one does not have definitive knowledge of a physical object. This measurement usually starts at the macroscopic level and then proceeds to interpret the same at the microscopic level. For instance, the physical property such as temperature or pressure is defined and understood both at the macro and micro level. This applies as well to consciousness an enigma that we are all familiar with but unable to come to grips with. Although attempts have been made to quantify and qualify consciousness this has been essentially at the macro level. There has been no attempt to define consciousness at the micro-level i.e. at the atomic or molecular level.
In this paper, the author begins with the definition and measurement of consciousness at the macroscopic level through papers published on the subject. Then, through three proposals/justification, interprets these macroscopic attributes to its equivalent at the microscopic level i.e. defining consciousness at the atomic and molecular level. This enables consciousness to be understood and defined in a fundamental manner and eliminates any vagueness in its concept. Although the final computation of such microscopic consciousness is intrinsically complex and beyond the scope of this paper it nevertheless points to the various parameters involved for computation of the same.
Science of Consciousness
Consciousness is an enigma that we are intimately familiar with but unable to define or measure. The Science of Consciousness is an attempt to come to grips with this magical entity called consciousness. There are a large number of institutions around the world that are conducting research and studies to quantify and qualify consciousness scientifically.
But despite centuries of analyses, definitions, explanations and debates by philosophers, scientists, mystics, neurosurgeons, psychologists, spiritualists, etc., consciousness remains puzzling and bewildering. The seat of consciousness, the brain, remains a complex organ with billions of neurons, trillions of synapses, astounding neural networks transforming in real-time and an internal language still undeciphered. Consciousness thus seems so complex that some experts have even declared it a fundamental or a primitive entity much like mass or charge of an elementary particle. Hence, in order to make headway and break this logjam when examining consciousness at the macro level, this paper suggests an alternate route, which is to examine consciousness at the micro-level i.e. at the atomic and molecular level.
It may be noted that in Physics several macroscopic physical properties are defined by their equivalent microscopic or atomic/molecular properties. Thus, for instance, the macroscopic property of Temperature is equivalent at the microscopic level to the average kinetic energy of the particles in a system. Similarly, the macroscopic property of Pressure can be described at the microscopic level as the force exerted by the particles when they bounce off the walls of the container of the system. Such definitions at the microscopic level invariably strengthen our understanding of nature by providing insight into the macroscopic property at the atomic and molecular level. Thus in this paper, an attempt will be made to describe the macroscopic property of consciousness through its equivalent macroscopic properties at the atomic and molecular levels. This will enable us to gain a fundamental understanding of consciousness.
Consciousness and Intelligence
Before one begins to discuss consciousness at the micro-level we need to measure it at the macro level. This is also true in case macro properties such as Temperature where we use a thermometer to measure the temperature at the macro level in Centigrade or Fahrenheit. Thus it is essential that one is able to measure consciousness at the macro level before exploring its origins at the micro-level. To measure consciousness at the macro level it’s important to delve into another entity that is closely related to consciousness: Intelligence. The debate on the relationship between intelligence and consciousness has been raging for quite some time and attempts to relate the two have been fruitful. Unlike consciousness which is an enigma, intelligence is more comprehensible. We are able to determine an intelligent individual and we are able to measure this through tests or through academic performance, etc. But a more rigorous treatise on intelligence and consciousness and the relationship between them can be ascertained from the paper “The Connection Between Intelligence and Consciousness” by Thomas Pinella, where he says:
There is a theoretical basis that supports the idea that intelligence and subjective experience (consciousness) are related at a fundamental level.
The paper discusses the nature of intelligence and consciousness which can be represented as a function which is the amount of information something can perceive or the richness of its consciousness. Based on the definition of the function
the definition of intelligence can be stated as follows:
Intelligence is the process of observing the world and compressing it into a simpler model capable of accurate prediction.
What about consciousness? Can consciousness be similarly modeled? One of the most highly debated, but also highly regarded theories involving consciousness is the Integrated Information Theory of Consciousness (IIT), developed by Giulio Tononi, a neuroscientist from the University of Wisconsin. The theory states that:
Consciousness arises when systems are able to take in information and integrate, or unify them, such that the result is more than the sum of its parts.
From the above definitions of intelligence and consciousness the connection between the two may be ascertained and surmised as below:
It turns out that the integration a system must perform on the incoming information is directly comparable to the compressing we must perform in order to achieve the definition of general intelligence.
Thus it is quite reasonable to say that there is an empirical relationship between intelligence and consciousness.
Relationship Between Consciousness and Intelligence
We can hence attempt to measure macroscopic consciousness by making the following proposal:
Proposal 1: Consciousness is proportional to intelligence (logical or creative).
Justification: From the above discussion on the definitive relationship between intelligence and consciousness we can begin with a linear and proportional relationship between the two. It is important to observe that the ultimate product of one’s consciousness is; One’s ability to be original and imaginative rather than being imitative or derivative. Thus we always admire the original works of artists such as Van Gough or scientists such as an Einstein and have high regard for their original contributions borne from a higher state of consciousness or equivalently intelligence (creative or logical). Also to ascertain skills of a candidate, tests, and exams are made to probe their understanding of the subject rather than their ability to learn by-heart or by-rote and reproduce from memory, thus ensuring comprehension and original thinking.
Thus to measure consciousness we measure its intelligence. Human intelligence, for instance, is deciphered through IQ tests or excellence in one's academic career. A higher intelligence signifies a higher state of consciousness. But it is important to note that intelligence is not just one's logical or scientific abilities but also one's creative or artistic abilities as well. Thus a measure of intelligence through both logical and creative IQ tests, for instance, is directly a measure of one’s state of consciousness.
One can measure the strength of consciousness through intelligence, not only for humans but for animals too. In apes and chimpanzees, one sees intelligence in their construction of tools from twigs or stones to forage for food. Rats are tested for their intelligence by their ability to learn and navigate successfully through a maze.
Since intelligence can be assimilated through learning, consciousness can also be stated to rise to a higher state through learned intelligence. Likewise simpler life forms such as amoeba use their rudimentary intelligence to avoid predators or to seek food. All these signify consciousness, however rudimentary, in macroscopic organisms including single-cell protozoa.
Microscopic Consciousness
But what about consciousness in matter? Indeed we are talking of consciousness at the atomic or molecular level. We all recognize as stated above the complex consciousness present in organisms at the macro level. But what is atomic consciousness? And how do we define it and how do we measure it? To quantify and measure atomic consciousness we make the next proposal.
Proposal 2: Microscopic consciousness is measured by microscopic intelligence just as macroscopic consciousness is measured by macroscopic intelligence.
Justification: We see from the above that macroscopic measure of consciousness through macroscopic intelligence proceeds all the way from humans to lower life forms. Thus even unicellular protozoa exhibit rudimentary consciousness by intelligently avoiding prey and seeking food. Hence there is no reason why one should not extend this logic even to matter at the atomic and molecular level. Thus one can say atomic or molecular consciousness is defined by atomic and molecular intelligence.
But what is atomic/molecular intelligence?
Definition of Atomic & Molecular Intelligence
In order to define atomic/molecular intelligence, we make the following proposal.
Proposal 3: The residual force of an atom or molecule is a measure of its intelligence and conversely the lack of residual force is a measure of its lack of intelligence.
Corollary: Since the lack of residual force results in the random behavior of an atom, molecule or a system then one can equivalently say that random behavior is equivalent to lack of consciousness/ intelligence.
Justification: The key to intelligence in the macro world, as stated above, is the ability of an entity to process information to make accurate predictions. Thus the key to intelligence lies in an entity’s ability in processing information. But what is information with which intelligence is closely associated with? Information is at the fundamental level is nothing but the organization of matter.
To explain heuristically, consider a jar of ball bearings to represent atoms or molecules. Let us say that we color each one of them to identify each one individually. Now suppose we were to shake the jar we would observe the ball bearings settling in a particular pattern. If we shook the jar again we will see another pattern. In fact, there is almost an infinite number of patterns that the ball bearings would settle into every time we shake the jar. We can say that there is no intelligence since we observe only random patterns. In other words, creating random patterns requires no creativity, talent or intelligence. But suppose we were to magnetize the ball bearings. We will now observe the bearings sticking to each other to form a particular pattern. This ability to form patterns is a non-random behavior and leads to the creation of structures which can be termed as a creative process or intelligent behavior.
We can equate the behavior of the ball-bearings to the behavior of atoms to arrive at the definition of atomic intelligence. Hence atoms or molecules or systems that do not have any residual forces, thus exhibiting random behavior, can be defined as non-intelligent. The elements referred to as noble gases or inert gases, because they do not have residual forces to react with other elements to form molecules, can be stated to be non-intelligent. Conversely, atoms or molecules that have residual forces will combine with other atoms or molecules to form structures, thus exhibiting non-random behavior, can, therefore, be termed as intelligent. All elements other than noble gases fit into this category since they have residual forces and react with other elements to form molecules. Since intelligence and consciousness are proportional as per proposal 1 & 2, we can say that atoms or molecules that with no residual forces, exhibiting random behavior, are not conscious while those with residual forces exhibiting non-random behavior are conscious. Apart from atoms and molecules, the above definition can also be applied to systems.
Consciousness/Intelligence of a Simple System
To further explain the concept of microscopic consciousness/intelligence and its relationship to random behavior, consider a simple system such as dice. A fair dice is one in which each face has one-sixth the probability of appearing face-up when tossed. In such a fair dice the center of gravity (CG) is precisely at the center of the cube. Thus if “w” is the width of the side of the cube then the CG of the cube lies at exactly w/2 in the x, y and z dimensions. Such a dice will exhibit pure random behavior and hence as per definition has zero internal intelligence. But suppose one were to load the dice to force it to deviate from its random behavior then we would have a non-random behavior and hence as per definition non-zero internal intelligence. Thus if one were to displace the CG of the dice from the center of the cube towards one of the faces then we have non-random behavior. Specifically, the CG can be moved anywhere from w/2 to 0 in either the x, y or z-direction. Such a dice will now exhibit a non-random behavior with one face appearing face-up more often. The more the deviation of the CG towards a face the more is the likelihood of the opposite face turning face-up since anybody will always tend to rest with its CG at the lowest position.
We can now discuss the intelligence of such a loaded dice vs. the fair dice. In this example, we have equated the intelligence to the non-random behavior or equivalently the ability to form a pattern. By setting the CG appropriately we can set the probability of a particular face from the random one-sixth to a non-random. To understand the relationship between non-random behavior of dice and its intelligence, consider a scale for the “IQ” of the dice going from 0 to 100 with 0 IQ representing no intelligence and 100 IQ representing max or full intelligence. The probability of any event is always a number from 0 to 1 with a 0 representing the event never occurs while a 1 represents that the event always occurs.
If we were to draw a graph of the IQ of the dice vs. the probability of a face turning face-up then as per definition of intelligence we have the following endpoints on the graph:
Probability (P): 1/6 (random behavior) IQ (I): 0 (no intelligence)
Probability (P): 1 (certainty) IQ (I): 100 (max intelligence)
A line joining these two endpoints would appear as in Fig 1:
Its equation would be: I = 120P-20
Thus when P=9/10, I=88. In other words, when the dice are loaded for a probability of 90% the IQ of the dice is 88. But what if the probability were made less than 1/6? This would mean that the CG is being shifted towards the opposite face. This only means that a different pattern would appear. Since we are not concerned with the actual pattern we can equate the probability of zero or the number never appearing (the opposite face always appearing) with an IQ of 100. Thus we get another set of endpoints as:
Probability (P): 0 (impossibility) IQ (I): 100 (max intelligence)
A line joining these two endpoints would appear as in Fig 2:
Its equation would be: I = -600P+100
I suppose we were to take several loaded dice each loaded to 90% chance of occurring; then such a system exhibits a particular pattern formation of (9/10)n where n is the number of loaded dices that are tossed. If n fair dices are used then a particular pattern has a probability of (1/6)n which is much less than (9/10)n. For example, if we took 2 fair dices then n=2 and the probability of a particular pattern occurring is (1/6)2 = 1/36 as opposed to a 90% loaded dice where the probability of pattern occurrence is (9/10)2 = 81/100. Thus as we increase the number of fair dices the formation of a particular pattern reduces to 0 and the intelligence of the system reduces to zero while with loaded dices the probability of a pattern and hence its intelligence remains high.
It can be inferred that the IQ of systems such as the dice depicted above is not just a measure of intelligence but also of consciousness as per proposal 1 & 2.
Atomic & Molecular Consciousness/Intelligence
If we were to equate the dice to atoms then we can equate pattern formation due to a residual gravitational force in dice to molecular formation due to residual electrical forces in the case of atoms. Hence the ability of an element A to form molecules or compounds with other elements through electrical bonds (ionic or covalent) is a measure of atom A’s consciousness/intelligence. The equivalent of shifting the CG to obtain a high probability in a dice can be equated to the strength of the bond between two atoms. Thus a strong bond leads to a stable molecule while a weak bond leads to an unstable molecule as in a reversible reaction; correspondingly the consciousness/intelligence of the atom increases or decreases.
Just as we compared a fair dice exhibiting random behavior and hence being unintelligent to a loaded dice forming patterns and hence being intelligent, we can likewise compare intelligent atoms to unintelligent or dumb atoms. “Dumb” atoms are therefore those that do not form molecules and exhibit pure random behavior. These elements are referred to as noble gases or inert gases because they do not react with other elements to form molecules. Helium (He), Neon (Ne), Argon (Ar), Krypton (Kr), Xenon (Xe) and Radon (Rn) remain as atoms not even combining with their own to form molecules such as H2 or O2 or Cl2. Since they have a complete octet in their outer shell they do not have any residual electrical forces to make them bond with other atoms to form molecules. Left to themselves they exhibit random behavior by bouncing off each other and remaining in a gaseous state. It resembles, as explained earlier, the random behavior of ball bearings contained in a bottle that is vigorously shaken. This is unintelligent behavior and these atoms can, therefore, be termed as dumb atoms or equivalently not being conscious.
Apart from the noble gases, all other atoms form molecules. Their ability to form molecules varies with their valence which can be anything from 1 through7. A measure of intelligence of an atom can, therefore, be its valence since it gives a measure of how many other atoms it can combine with, resulting in a variety of molecules. But a better measure of an atom’s intelligence is also its ability to form chains or repeated links thereby forming complex compounds. Carbon with its exceptional ability to form long chains as witnessed in the chain structure of Hydrocarbons can be termed as very “clever” or highly conscious.
IQ of Atoms & Molecules
To put a number on the IQ of an atom is, therefore, a difficult task since it should take into consideration a variety of properties such as valence, ability to bond with other atoms, the strength of these bonds, ability to form chains, ambient temperature, concentration, etc. The equilibrium constant of a reaction is another factor to consider. Factors such as ambient temperature or concentration which vary geographically from one place to another or indeed from one planet to another indicate that intelligence in matter can be enhanced or suppressed depending on the environment. Hence the evolution of intelligent life in the universe is highly dependent on these enabling factors present at a particular location which either facilitates or impedes consciousness/intelligence in matter. Thus even though the IQ of atoms is difficult to pin down, the extremes are easy to appreciate. The noble gases display zero consciousness/intelligence at one end of the scale while Carbon atoms display maximum consciousness/intelligence at the other end of the scale in our Earth environment. Where the other atoms fall in this scale of consciousness/intelligence is a complex equation deciphering which is not a simple task and hence beyond the scope of this concept paper.
Similar to the consciousness/intelligence of atoms one can consider the consciousness/intelligence of molecules such as proteins or enzymes or hormones. These complex molecules have specific sites where other molecules fit like a lock and key triggering chain reactions. Indeed DNA can be considered the pinnacle of molecular consciousness/intelligence with its ability to code complex genetic information resulting in complex organisms.
In summary, the consciousness of atoms and molecules is directly proportional to their intelligence (Proposal 2) which has been elaborated above to be due to residual electrical forces that make them bond with one another (Proposal 3).
Philosophical/Theological Implications
Thus although we have not been able to put a number on the complex consciousness/intelligence of atoms and molecules what is pertinent in this discussion is to appreciate the existence of consciousness/intelligence at the fundamental level of atoms/molecules which can be termed as internal consciousness/intelligence. To reiterate, a measure of this consciousness/intelligence is its ability to form molecules.
The existence of internal consciousness/intelligence as explained above leads to the logical conclusion that there is no necessity for an external intelligence or God to form complex organisms from simple atoms/molecules. It is this internal consciousness/intelligence built into atoms/molecules that is responsible for the creation of complex matter or organisms as opposed to an external consciousness/intelligence which has been prophesied since times immemorial. Further, it is this complex internal consciousness/intelligence, which though difficult to decipher, has been the elusive and bewildering mystery behind creation that has resulted in the conception of God and religion.
References
The Connection Between Intelligence and Consciousness (The Challenges we Face), Thomas Pinella (http://writing.rochester.edu/celebrating/2017/NAShonorable.pdf)
Chalmers, D.J. 1997. Moving forward on the problem of consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies
Chalmers, David John. The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Theory of Conscious Experience. New York: Oxford UP, 1996. Print.
Chalmers, D.J., Facing Up to the Problems of Consciousness
Franz, A. (2015). Artificial general intelligence through recursive data compression and grounded reasoning: a position paper.
Hawkins, Jeff, and Sandra Blakeslee. On Intelligence. New York: Times, 2004. Print.
Kriegel, U. Mysterianism. For the Oxford Companion to Consciousness
Maguire, P., et al. (2014). Is Consciousness Computable? Quantifying Integrated Information Using Algorithmic Information Theory.
McDermott, D. (2007). Artificial Intelligence and Consciousness. The Cambridge Handbook of Consciousness. Cambridge University Press
Tononi, G. (2008). Consciousness as Integrated Information: a Provisional Manifesto. Biol. Bull. 215: 216 –242
Author's Email ID: ravinshankar1028@gmail.com
