<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">---------- Forwarded message ---------<br>From: <strong class="gmail_sendername" dir="auto">jose luis perez velazquez</strong> <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jlpvjlpv@gmail.com">jlpvjlpv@gmail.com</a>></span><br>Date: Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 12:51 PM<br>Subject: Further comments<br>To: <<a href="mailto:fis-request@listas.unizar.es">fis-request@listas.unizar.es</a>><br></div><br><br><div dir="ltr"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> Colleagues,
thank you all for your comments to our New Year's digital seminar. I will try to answer some things in those comments received so far in
a more or less compact manner.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> <b>Francesco R</b>. points out different
notions of consciousness, and also of entropy. Let us clarify some things that,
perhaps because of the word limitations, were not made apparent in the “talk”
and of course more details can be found in the two PRE papers listed in the
references. Nonetheless, let me say for
now that we deal with <i>conscious awareness</i>,
we prefer not to delve into the diverse connotations of consciousness (Edelman’s
primary consciousness, higher-order etc.), rather our study deals in fact more
with <i>optimality of sensory awareness</i>
than with consciousness itself (even though these two are absolutely related,
of course). Let me explain why because that was something we could not describe
in the text due to the space limit. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> Briefly, as
can be seen in our PRE 2016 paper, the entropy associated with subjects closing
their eyes is lower than that calculated with eyes open. Obviously, one is
equally conscious with eyes open or closed (unless one is sleeping!). Thus,
what does this mean? In animals like us that depend almost totally in visual
input, stopping visual stimuli to the brain causes remarkable changes in brain
dynamics. To wit, the appearance of very rhythmic oscillation, the alpha
rhythm, in parieto-occipital cortex (but it can be recorded as well in frontal
and temporal areas). Some studies have found that brain complexity is lower and
its structure more organised with eyes closed (I don’t exactly remember but I
think they used graph theory or similar), not too surprising after we see the
very periodic and beautiful alpha; hence, not surprising either that this “more
organised brain” is manifested in our study showing lower entropy. For these
reasons, we tend to think that our entropy reflects more <i>optimality of sensory manipulations</i> rather than “pure” consciousness
(for visual animals like us, being blind is not optimal at all!).</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> And this
brings us to Francesco’s comment on the diverse entropies (which I will call
from now on S for short… my fingers are getting tired of typing). There are
indeed different notions of S and this is why it is important to specify what S
is being computed. In our case it is the S associated with the <i>number of configurations of connected signals/networks.</i>
<b>Pedro C.M</b>., in two of his points,
refers to entropy, for instance: “</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial"> if the inner
processes ring some alarm, that entropy would escalate enormously</span>”. <span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">This in fact cannot occur in our case, because the
S has a maximum value for certain number of configurations of connections, namely,
when the number of connected signals are the same as the not connected. This is
why the S graphs in the papers (and in my cartoon in the talk) are inverted Us,
a Gaussian basically – the maximum S is at the top of the curve, it cannot increase
any further</span><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">. Many of the S values we see in awake-eyes open are
close to this top, hence almost maximal.
It is important to emphasise again that we are evaluating the number of
configurations of connections, the fact we go one step further and obtain an S adds
very little in terms of concept but makes the wording and data presentation
easier. That is, in awake-eyes open we have near maximal number of possible
configurations (our microstates), and the macrostate is represented by all
those configurations. For those into chemistry, this is akin to chemical equilibrium:
equilibrium is found at the top of the Gaussian where the quantity of the two molecules
of a chemical reaction (for the sake of simplicity let’s assume it is a
reaction involving 2 molecules) is the same, and far from equilibrium we have
lots of one molecule and little of the other. Sorry for this digression into chemistry,
but I am a biochemist after all. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> So this is our S, but if we were to consider
the S applied to other aspects, say, ions/molecules, it would be different. Just
extract the brain of a mouse and homogeneize it (a common biochemical technique
to make neuronal milk shake). The S of molecules has increased vastly, complete
disorder of ions and molecules. But this is not the S we are talking about
here. That molecular mess cannot process any information/sensory input because
there is no organization of cell networks, connections and all that. Can our S capture brain dynamics, as <b>Pedro</b> asks? To some extent, but only in
its global character, this is then reason for the second PRE paper, “</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">Consciousness as a <i>global property</i> of brain dynamic activit</span>y”,
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">where we used </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:black;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">LZC which allowed us to capture the “microscopic”
dynamics, the fluctuations in the configurations of connections that our S
cannot capture. By the way, Pedro, when you say “</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">All the
brain areas relatively silent in the left side of your figure, when transiently
connected with some portion of the central cluster of the conscious space” </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">I
am not sure you understood the figure, the x-axis does not represent “silence”,
or activity, in brain areas, it is number of synchronous channels: in the left the number of synchronised
networks is lower, but those nets may be very active, just not synchronised.
Higher activity does not always lead to more synchrony, to wit, right at the start
of epileptic seizures, when the cellular activity begins to grow, there is normally
a decrease in synchrony (which then increases during the ictal event).</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><b><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:black"> Loet L.,</span></b><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:black"> </span><b><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Joseph B., </span></b><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:black">and <b>Francesco </b>have
related points mentioning Prigiogine’s order through fluctuations and
emergence. My opinion is that S is a concept humans created to characterise/understand
phenomena, but I would not claim it is the cause of processes (like H. Haken
thought as well, in his “Information and self-organization” book). It is for
this reason we normally use the terms “S associated with…” in our papers. It is
hard, in open, complex systems, to talk about cause and effect. As <b>Joseph B</b>. mentions, </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">the emergent entity being actualized is not totally separate
from states from which it emerged. Remember Haken’s enslaving principle. The “control mechanisms” (Loet’s words) that
may exist operating in neural feedback loops are hard to disentangle, because,
due to the enslaving, one microscopic aspect may become a macroscopic “force”
at some level. <b>Alexander F</b>. mentions
their theory about the nested hierarchy of brain processes and talks about
causal relations. But as for our study, we don’t know. All we can say is that
awareness is associated with larger number of possible configurations of connections
among brain areas that may be needed for the integration and segregation of
sensory-motor activities. We are now, as an extension of our work, trying to come
up with an evolution law, something that will allow us to make some predictions
about what can be found in certain brain states. This evolution equation may be
related to the probability of connections, but we are not sure yet… this is something
for another talk.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial"> Let me mention too that </span><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:black">fluctuations are fundamental for pattern
formation, and in the nervous system we talk about fluctuations in synchrony
that, perhaps via dynamical bifurcations (the existence of bifurcations in
brain activity, at least in epilepsy, has been obtained <i>in vivo: ‘</i></span><span lang="EN-GB">Dynamical regimes underlying epileptiform
events: role of instabilities and bifurcations in brain activity’ </span>Perez
Velazquez et al., <i> </i><i><span lang="EN-GB">Physica D</span></i><span lang="EN-GB">, 186, 205-220, 2003</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">), create
patterns of organised neuronal activity. It is this organised activity pattern
that is the fundamental for a proper, healthy brain information processing. In
seizures you find lot of synchrony with not enough variability in the configurations
of connections, hence not good for sensorimotor processing, thus loss of awareness
is common during seizures. There is an extensive literature suggesting that variability
in brain activity is associated with good health -- not only in
neurophysiology, but also in cardiac activity, hormonal concentrations etc…
Variability makes you healthy!).</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial"> </span></b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">Sorry
we missed, in our papers, to mention some parallels of our results with<b> Alexander F’s </b>Operational Architectonics<b>, </b>above all that phenomenal consciousness refers to a higher level of
organization in the brain. We will take note of this for future publications. </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> And finally, let me mention that
I tend to agree with Pierre Gloor in his view of consciousness that he expounded
in ‘Consciousness as a neurological concept in epileptology: a<b> c</b>ritical
review' (<i>Epilepsia
</i>27 (Suppl. 2): S14-S26, 1986): “Consciousness
cannot therefore be external to itself; it cannot be an “object, out there”; it
thus cannot be observed. If I may be allowed to use the metaphor of describing
consciousness as the <i>only</i><b><i> </i></b>window through which we can look at the
world, then it follows that when looking through this window we cannot see the
window itself, even though it, too, is part of the world. Consciousness thus
conceived is not an objectively verifiable datum; it therefore cannot be
defined, and its very nature is not accessible to any form of objective
analysis”. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> Like Gloor, I do not want to
search for strict definitions of consciousness, rather for properties of it,
which can be investigated, e.g. memory, self-awareness, motor actions etc. To me, consciousness, like life, can be best defined
by enumerating properties rather than by a strict sentence.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:8pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> This is all
for now. My colleague Ramon, I am sure, will have more things to add and
comment.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt;line-height:normal;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><br></span></p></div>
</div></div><div id="DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><br>
<table style="border-top:1px solid #d3d4de">
<tr>
<td style="width:55px;padding-top:13px"><a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail" target="_blank"><img src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif" alt="" width="46" height="29" style="width: 46px; height: 29px;"></a></td>
<td style="width:470px;padding-top:12px;color:#41424e;font-size:13px;font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;line-height:18px">Virus-free. <a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail" target="_blank" style="color:#4453ea">www.avast.com</a>
</td>
</tr>
</table><a href="#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2" width="1" height="1"></a></div>