Hey TS, thanks for highlighting the article which tried to summarize an excellent study. I pulled down the study it referred to and read it. My impressions:
The Abstract thesis was summarized in its closing statement, "Our results establish that consciousness rests on the brain’s ability to sustain rich brain dynamics..." Good stuff...
An initial concern at face value is, that the study starts by assuming and encoding the answer (Omega Hypothesis). This is shown in the prior art disclosures by the statement: "consciousness
relates to a dynamic process of self-sustained, coordinated brain-scale activity assisting the tuning to a constantly evolving environment, rather than in static descriptions of brain function [my note:
Recursive Turing Sufficiency rather than Monist Turing Sufficiency]. In that respect, neural signals combine, dissolve, reconfigure, and recombine over time, allowing perception, emotion, and cognition to happen." I've had my ass kicked by senior board members and advisory panel scientists for using the code-worded amphibology 'relates to' inside an assertion claim in a patent or study...
...however here - what choice are we left with? Still an exciting study. My point in bringing this up is to cite that it behooves the ethical skeptic to note that the study is NOT enforcing a nihilist view of consciousness - a
résultat célébré which will inevitably arise in the minds of the religious nihilist. The authors have carefully chosen their words so as not to indicate this specific conclusion. Do not let them pull this trick on you.
The study makes it clear that both anesthesia and sleep states serve to reduce meta-identity (temporal) states to near zero. The prior art cited in the statement "and [in sleep] the dynamic explorations are limited to specific patterns that are dominated by rigid functional configurations tied to the anatomical connectivity."
The study contrasted the fMRI 42-region cross indexes of four states of human consciousness 1 - normal conscious, 2 - cognitive-motor dissociation, 3 - patients scanned under propofol anesthesia (essential here that all had administered the same anesthesia agent), and 4 - unresponsive (coma). The results profiled as such:
Normal Cognitive-Motor Dissociation Propofol Anesthesia Unresponsive
The regressions on the right hand side of the above graphic indicate a direct arrival impact of 'state of awareness' upon 42-center interaction. A solid relationship between center function and cognitive
ability, not simply state, of awareness.
The Challenge This Therefore Presents.
1. Temporal activity (meta-awareness, meta-identity as shown by the blue versus red in the graphics) depends SOLELY upon functional center complex 'rich dynamics' (interareal coordination).
2. The absence of such 'rich dynamics' correlates highly with being Unresponsive Wakefulness State (UWS).
3. Static memories are not enough therefore, to 'reboot' the brain after a UWS state. The interareal coordination must be re-established but also maintain a meta-identity function which survives this neutral capability. There is no physical center which functions in this regard.
4. Experiences during comas (such as Eben Alexander had)
require then a 'subfunctional interareal coordination reboot sector' of the brain which does not, nor can it, exist - because the brain cannot register (meta-cognition) during a coma - iow, it cannot 'distinguish nor make a memory' - the fMRI makes this clear - as there is no interareal coordination which would allow for the fomation of even a fantasy memory.
This reboot interareal coordination would act as a pilot light of sorts - like on your gas water heater. Serving two functions
- reboot interareal coordination
- maintain meta-identity
So this begs the question: Where does this interareal coordination/re-boot consciousness therefore reside then?