[MD] Emergent Consciousness

[Case]

[Ian]
To understand "emergence" as a concept you need to start by reading
some "Chaos" say James Gleick or Ian Stewart for popular starters, or
some more directly relevant stuff from Doug Hofstadter or E O Wilson,
or any of the more neo-Darwinian philsophers....

[Case]
My first encounter with the idea of emergence was in Michael Polanyi's book
Personal Knowledge many moons ago. The short version he offered up was that
the laws of physics can not predict the rules of chess. 

[Ian]
(In fact the "spirals" of your beloved whatshisname are another example.) if
I get time, I'll try an essay to summarise ... basically, briefly ....

Patterns (we'd call them SPV's I think in MoQ terms) arise in layers
of abstraction above the level of physical interactions, that are
driven by "attractors" in the nature of the interactions, rather than
by predictable causal consequences of the sum of the individial
interactions.

[Case]
Mandelbrot drew the spirals but as for attractors they occur purely as
probability patterns in a chaotic system. For example the weather is highly
dynamic and unpredictable and yet given the right mix of heat and moisture
highly organized patterns can emerge in the form of hurricanes, tornados or
dust devils. One could even point various static ocean currents like the
Gulf Stream or say the jet stream in the upper atmosphere.

What this says to me is that very complicated, organized and static forms
can arise spontaneously from seemingly random input. Once a hurricane
emerges as a static pattern new levels of uncertainty arise with respect to
it trajectory and duration.

But let me start at the beginning:

My grasp of quantum physics is tenuous and I could use some help on this but
as Gene points out as near as I can figure almost everything from gravity to
subatomic particles is about motion. Einstein explained gravity as analogous
to centrifugal force. I believe Einstein actually won the Nobel prize for
his work on Brownian motion. Even the uncertainty principle seems to be
about predicting the position of a particle. In the end you are left with a
statement of probability about either where a particle is or where it is
going. Heat is just a measure of particles in motion. Motion seems to be the
first step in establishing static patterns at a fundamental level. Those
patterns revolve around the probability was various kinds of interactions
can occur.

At the level of quarks and subatomic particles probabilities are very shaky
until relatively static patterns are formed. As say, protons which Gene
described as a relatively stabile pattern between quarks in motion. As we
proceed up the scale ever more uncertainties are resolved and become stable
(read static or with probabilities closer to 100%) By the time you get to
the molecular level the properties that various atoms bring to patterns are
fairly static and the probability that they will behave in certain ways is
relatively certain. However, in the process of these uncertainties resolving
whole new kinds of patterns are possible among the various kinds of atoms. 

Carbon, by virtue of its position on the periodic table is capable of an
enormous number of stabile patterns with many other elements. And carbon
molecules by virtue of these many patterns are capable of assuming ever more
complicated sets of patterns.

Each new level of complex of patterns is possible as uncertainty is reduced
and static patterns form at each lower level. I have been told that purely
quantum effects are still relevant at the level of proteins as they effect
the way proteins fold. But above this level those uncertainties are resolved
and can pretty much be disregarded. 

At the cellular level complex molecules form a host of patterns that result
in the formation of intercellular structures which are stable pattern of
interaction among these molecules.

But notice that it all begins with chaotic states of motion or rest. As
patterns of motion and rest become static, we start to talk about patterns
of matter and energy. As we move upward we start to talk about patterns of
attraction or repulsion, positive and negative charges. As we move upward we
make distinctions between living and dead. Then upward we have male and
female. Then upward to: us and them.

As Ian points out, "consequences at the "human" scale are seen through many
layers of emergence." What I find interesting is that at every level there
seems to be an inherent dualism and that each duality pair seems to resolve
to active and passive or: Static and Dynamic.

This is also why I find it more useful to think in terms of levels or
degrees of resolution rather than to settle on four arbitrarily fixed static
levels.