March 8 and March 15, 2012 Neuroplasticity and Consciousness by Gary S

     I had not heard either of Gary's presentations on this topic. I am sure it was quite erudite and informative.
The following is my writing that I felt would briefly define the idea of neuroplasticity for those who also were not present at these two presentations. Since I wrote this, Gary has forwarded his detailed notes to me. They are posted here for both sessions of March 8 and March 15. Hit Read more below to see and read those notes.
     During most of the 20th century, neuroscientists thought that the brain and its connections developed in early infancy and childhood and that once adult or even preadult type cognition developed there was little change that could occur to the brain structure and its neuroconnections. However, studies began in the late 20th century and continuing into 2012 seem to belie this idea. Individual studies of people who have sustained either traumatic or ischemic brain injury indicate that experiences, training and repetitive behaviors can modify neural tracts in such a way that a damaged function in the central nervous system can be made up for within the nerve tissue itself. The only explanation for some of these described cases is that the brain structure and the brains's neural pathways were changed by actively training them. We now have decades of research that shows that substantial changes can and do occur in the lowest neocortical processing areas of the brain, and these changes can dramatically alter the pattern of neuron activation in response to experiences. This indicates that experience can actually change both the brain's physical structure (anatomy) and functional organization (physiology).
     Here is a quote from Wikipedia which describes these changes very well:  "One of the fundamental principles of how neuroplasticity functions is linked to the concept of synaptic pruning, which is the idea that individual connections within the brain are constantly being removed or recreated, largely dependent on how they are used. This concept is captured in the aphorism, "If there are two nearby neurons that often produce an impulse simultaneously, their cortical maps may become one. This idea also works in the opposite way, i.e. that neurons which do not regularly produce simultaneous impulses will form different maps.
    Likewise the idea that brain connections were immutable was accompanied by an idea that we had all the brain cells that we were going to have when we were born, or at least after a short time of infancy, and none were created later in life. But it turns out that we can make new brain cells in the hippocampus and in the olfactory bulb areas of the brain later in life, and these new cells can dramatically affect cortical connections and functioning. And in other areas of the brain such as the cerebrum where new cells are not made later in life, there is evidence that experience based reorganization of the synaptic networks do occur even in the cerebrum.
     A 2005 study found that the effects of neuroplasticity occur even more rapidly than previously expected. Medical students' brains were imaged during the period when they were studying for their exams. In a matter of months, the students' gray matter increased significantly in the posterior and lateral parietal cortex.
     It is also now postulated that sometimes these neuroplatic changes are positive such as when the brain is able to recover from a significant injury such as a stroke and areas of the brain are able to compensate for the damaged areas. But sometimes these neuroplastic changes can be negative, such as in spasticity or tonic paralysis, in which an excessive release of neurotransmitters can even kill nerve cells. Also drug addiction and obsessive-compulsive disorder are deemed "negative neuroplasticiy" since a synaptic rewiring seems to to be produced by allwoing these abnormal behaviors to go on without behavioral alteration. These negative behaviors seem to reproduce and amplify themselves.
          Several investigations of the effects of meditation and fitness and exercise on brain function have produced some remarkable findings. For example, a number of studies have linked meditation practice to differences in cortical thickness or density of gray matter. Our own Richard Davison, a neuroscientist from the University of Wisconsin, has conducted experiments with the cooperation of the Dalai Lama, certainly an expert in meditation practice. The results suggest that long-term, or short-term practice of meditaion results in different levels of activity in brain regions associated with such qualities as attention, anxiety,d epression, fear, anger, etc. These functional changes may be caused by changes in the physical structure of the brain. Likewise a study of mice that were run on a treadmill, versus those who were forced to swim a water maze with adverse treatment to make them strive harder than just the voluntary treadmill runners, showed that though both groups improved their workouts, the mice who were forcibly exercised in the water maze showed a greater molecular change in more areas than the voluntary treadmillers. This would seem to indicate that different types of exercise create actual structural changes in different areas of the brain. Studies of this nature are in their infancy and would seem to provide much promise for future learning about this topic.

Note: Not having been at these two meetings, I do not know if this is at all what was discussed, but I did find this information quite interesting and thought the group might like to have it at their fingertips in this blog.

Here are Gary's notes from his presentations on March 8 and March 15. No doubt you will enjoy these erudite explanations. Hit Read more to find these notes.

Schrodinger’s Cat, Neuroplasticity and Meditation

This discussion is largely based on a book entitled “The Mind and The Brain,” by Jeffrey M. Schwartz, M.D. By way introduction, Dr. Schwartz is a child psychiatrist whose area of specialty is OCD. In the 90s, he developed a meditation oriented  behavioral cognitive therapy for OCD.

The neurological basis for OCD had been pretty well worked out, using various brain scanning techniques. Three areas of the brain called the orbital prefrontal cortex, anterior cingulate and caudate seem to be involved in a way that results in a perseveration of the thoughts and urges that OCD causes. As these areas are excited by a trigger, like a dirty object, they become more active, eventually self-sustaining and difficult to break out of, euphemistically called “brain lock.”

Schwartz was already aware that, while standard cognitive therapy had been shown to be effective for depression, it was not effective for patients with OCD. He subsequently pursued a 4 step behavioral cognitive therapeutic technique, that differed from classical cognitive therapy by emphasizing OCD as impersonal, allowing people to react without emotion to the discomfort it cost. The 1st step is to relabel what is happening. “It's not me. It's my OCD.” The 2nd step is to re-attribute what is happening. “OCD is an illness of the brain.” The next step is to refocus one's attention onto some adaptive behavior, like gardening. The final step is to revalue what has happened, whereby the compulsion is understood as senseless.

As this technique was used, many people with OCD were helped. Further, subsequent brain scans revealed a decrease in the activity in the areas of the brain previously mentioned. It had become evident that the biological function of the brain had been altered by a change in one's thinking. Essentially: “I am not my thoughts. My thoughts are not facts.” PET studies confirmed that successfully treated patients with OCD had demonstrated systematic changes in metabolic activity in the OCD circuit of the brain.

The notion of neuroplasticity was subsequently discussed. Plasticity in children was well known. This means that the brain can change in response to growth and changes in demands made on it. Sensory systems, like vision, depend on environmental input to finish neuronal wiring. This is the basis for exposing infants to a more visually enriched environment. It was also known that a young brain could compensate for injury to a particular region by shifting the function of the damaged area to an unaffected area.

However, it was widely thought that the adult brain was fairly static. Thus, when a person suffered a stroke, it was thought that any subsequent paralysis was permanent. It was only when silver spring monkeys were studied, that we learned that nonuse accounted for a stroke patient's inability to use a paralyzed limb. Motivation was crucial. If a person made an effort to move a limb and it did not move, a form of negative feedback was set into place; the limb would not move when subsequent efforts to move the limb would be made. The nerves involved would degenerate. This led to a form of treatment called “constraint induced movement therapy.” This would involve constraining the healthy limb and encouraging the affected limbs to develop some compensatory movements. A reversal of the formerly shrunken cortical representation of the affected limb was noted. There was “a recruitment of motor areas adjacent to the original location” of the stroke area. It was also noted that the corresponding contralateral area of the other hemisphere had been recruited to help with the new movement of the paralyzed limb in what is now called “use dependent cortical reorganization.” Indeed, there is a competition for available cortical space, and this is won by the function that is being most used.

This treatment was then generalized to people who had suffered a left hemispheric stroke that largely destroyed their Wernicke's area, resulting in serious impairments in the ability to use and comprehend spoken words. As people were exposed to therapy and improved, it was found that regions in the right hemisphere, corresponding in position to the left cortex’s Wernicke’s area and other language centers, had become active. The analogous right zone areas had compensated for the loss of the left zone areas.

Further studied, were people who had been blind from an early age. The primary visual cortex does not receive input from the retina via the optic nerve. It was seen that Braille and performing other fine tactile discrimination tasks would activate the visual cortex. These are tasks usually handled by the somatosensory cortex. The visual cortex is now taking up tactile processing in what is called “cross modal functional plasticity.”

Thus we have seen that a form of cortical remapping results from the reduction of sensory input after things like strokes or amputations. Regions of the somatosensory cortex representing other parts of the body invade those areas represented by the now sensory deprived part of the body. The next step was to show that with directed effort, the mind “ could function as its own internally directed mapmaker.” Schwartz next began to explore “use-dependent cortical reorganization.” This involves modeling in response to behavioral commands. An initial study involved looking at the representation of the digits of the right-hand versus the left-hand of string musicians versus non-musicians. There was no difference between the right hands of each group, but the left hands were represented to a significantly greater degree in the somatosensory area representing the fingers, consistent with cortical reorganization in the string players. A further study compared non-musicians who learned a five-finger piano exercise to non-musicians who merely thought of the exercise. It turned out that merely thinking about moving the fingers produced brain changes comparable to the changes caused by actually moving them. So, it is the brain’s capacity for neuroplasticity that leaves the brain both vulnerable to disabilities as well as opening the door to reversing the disabilities, and the brain can change in response to outside stimuli and in response to directed mental effort. Experience can only mold the brain of someone who is attending to it being molded.

This was generalized and proved to be the basis for a program called Fast ForWord, a treatment program for dyslexic children. This does not involve any change in the quantity or quality of sensory input. Instead all the patients did was use mindfulness to respond differently to their thoughts. Schwartz generalized this information to the treatment of OCD, as above, as well as to Tourette's syndrome, illnesses that involve similar brain structures and similar four step treatment programs. Someone else then generalized a similar treatment program for depression, in an effort to disrupt the automatic segue from sadness to sickness. Mindfulness skills are used to disengage from dysfunctional ways of thinking and focus instead on alternatives, thus lessening the potential for relapse of their depression. Patients used their focus on inhalations and exhalation's to increase their moment-by-moment awareness and to allow them to view thoughts and feelings as merely passing events in the mind and brain.

The will’s ability to change the brain in OCD, stroke, Tourette’s, and now depression by activating adaptive circuitry is a form of “top-down plasticity,” because it originates in the brain's higher order functions. “Bottom-up plasticity”, in contrast, is brought about by changes in sensory stimuli like the loss of input from amputation.

Somewhere between top-down and bottom-up, purely mental versus purely sensory events, is the realm of experience. Studies in animals had revealed that a little structure near the center of the brain called the hippocampus is involved in the formation of directional memories. Subsequently, it was found that the rear part of the hippocampus was significantly larger in taxi drivers than other men, while the front was smaller. When exposed to an enriched environment, there is an increase in the part of the hippocampus called the dentate gyrus. Indeed, neural stem cells persist in the adult brain and support ongoing neurogenesis resulting in newly generated neurons associated with the ability to acquire new memories.

Left us now hearken back to my favorite topic, quantum physics. At its core, quantum physics challenges the age-old belief of an objective world/cosmos independent and uninfluenced by observation. On the other hand, quantum physics asserts that there is no objective world/cosmos without observation. The double-slit experiment, as you may recall, is the foundation for quantum physics. The central result of this experiment is that a photon exists as a probability wave of information that includes the probability of finding the particle in any particular place at any particular time. The photon exists in these superpositions, as they are known, until the wave function is collapsed by observation, at which point the probability wave becomes a particle, hence the dual nature of a photon. Electrons and ions have also been shown to have this dual nature.

There are three theories that deal with the shift from a superposition of probabilities to the definite state of a particle. The first is called the hidden variable theory, favored by Einstein who insisted, “God does not play dice with the universe.” It asserts that the probabilities are only probabilistic because we don't understand the underlying rules of determinism that must exist. This theory has not survived the test of time, falling by the wayside in the 1960s when Jonathan Bell developed his theory of non-locality, which showed the entanglement of all particles unneeded level. This is been confirmed repeatedly in a variety of experiments.

The second theory is known as the ”many worlds view.” This asserts that no single possibility for the collapsed wave is ever selected but that the wave function continues to evolve in many worlds that split off from the one world known to us. Every one of the experiential possibilities is realized in some super realm, and, every time an observation or conscious choice is made, countless and different copies of your mind are created and exist in each super realm. Interestingly, while this theory sounds bizarre, it continues to have many adherents. There seems to be a preference for this thinking, as opposed to allowing for the apparent significance of an observer, which brings us to the final viewpoint.

The Copenhagen interpretation asserts that an observer chooses which of many possibilities comes into being in the form of an observation. Quantum mechanics cannot be formulated without consciousness. Mind and consciousness can’t be described in terms of the materialistic terms of the position of atoms (ie. the ”brain”) because the atoms are derived from the consciousness of the observer. Physical theory changed from a theory of physical reality to a theory of knowledge of physical reality; an ontological theory became an epistemological one. Classical physics has no way to account for consciousness. This has been a difficult paradigmatic shift, partly reflected in the popularity of the many worlds theory. Physics is still taught more as an engineering exercise than a philosophical one.

This difficult shift was also reflected in the Schrodinger’s cat paradigm that came to represent the Copenhagen interpretation. Consciousness was introduced as a substitute for objective reality. This thought experiment was introduced by Schrodinger in 1935 to illustrate the bewilderment of quantum superpositions. A cat is placed in a box with a poison pellet and a radioactive atom. The poison pellet is released when the radioactive atom decays. Radioactive decay is a quantum phenomenon, and therefore probabilistic. The box is sealed and the observer waits. Once the radioactive material has a 50-50 chance of decaying and the poison gas has a 50-50 chance of being delivered, the question becomes whether the cat is dead or alive. Until an observer looks inside the box the cat is considered in a superposition between life and death as the radioactive pellet is in a superposition between decay and not. There are many problems with how this paradigm is set up. It is not considered as a metaphor, but rather literally. While the cat is considered a participant, it is also quite obviously an observer as well.

Jon von Neumann noted that Schrodinger’s paradigm, and the Copenhagen interpretation, was inconsistent. Everything about the experiment was considered in quantum terms until we come to the part of the observing brain. Indeed, in the paradigm, the observer is external to the quantum state the observer is observing, witnessing the collapse of the wave function and not a part of it. Von Neumann formulated that every experiential event, such as reading a measuring device or otherwise making an observation, had a corresponding brain event. Thus, the observing brain operates according to the rules of quantum mechanics, as well.

Now we come to the role of ions, in the human brain. Ions, like photons, have a dual nature that includes a wave phase of potential, existing in superpositions, waiting to be collapsed. Please recall from previous discussions, involving the work of Harry Stapp, that the brain exists in a quantum state as a collection of parallel potentialities of wave potentials corresponding to any variety of ions. These are continuously collapsed, or not, to specific ions, like potassium, that subsequently affect cellular charge and transmission of neural information. Thus, the brain is a continuously evolving cloud of conceivable potentialities. The potentialities are envisioned as neural correlates of many mutually exclusive possible experiences. These experiences are associated with a certain element of intent and effort in the person that presumably affects the size and intensity of the cloud of potential. This allows past experiences to be considered before a choice is made. We can then make a choice that collapses the cloud of potential to a form corresponding to the new knowledge that is gained, in conjunction with the conscious act of experiencing the outcome of the observation. The collapse of the wave function allows an active role for the observer. Thus, mind can actively affect matter and shape brain.

Swartz developed the concept he called “mental force” to explain self-directed neuroplasticity as well as the change in brain circuitry responsible for healthier behavior in OCD patients. There is a willful effort to redirect attention, which is the key to altering one's brain function. The mental effort keeps in focus the stream of consciousness that collapses the wave functions to actualize the healthier potentialities that are in accord with the consciously selected ends. However, the notion of willful effort, or free will, has been a difficult concept to define historically.

Researcher Ben Libet found that between 0.4 and 4 seconds before the initiation of a voluntary movement there is a shift in the pattern of electrical activity in the cerebral cortex. It is a slow, electrically negative brainwave called the, ”readiness potential.” The readiness potential begins, on average, 550 ms prior to a movement. All readiness potentials are followed by a muscle movement. However, the 550 ms time duration seemed intuitively unlikely to coincide with an act of conscious will. The interval seemed too long. Rather, it seemed conscious will followed the onset of the readiness potential. Indeed, it was subsequently shown that awareness of a voluntary act appears 350 ms subsequent to the readiness potential. Consciousness of the intention to move appears about 100 to 200 ms before the move was activated. This, it seems, is long enough for a person to decide not to perform a movement it was on the cusp of occurring and was termed “free won’t.” Libet’s findings suggest that free will operates to suppress an activity rather then to initiate one.

William James had long ago speculated that will derives not from the freedom to initiate thoughts, but to focus on and select some while blocking others. In Buddhism, the quality of awareness or attention determines the nature of the consciousness that arises. The only willful choice one has is the quality of attention one gives to a thought at any moment. In Schwartz's four steps, to refocus mindfully away from a destructive obsession or compulsive urge and onto a benign object of attention is the core volitional act.

The OCD patient is faced with two competing systems of brain circuitry. The first is the passively experienced pathological obsessions. The second encodes information that the obsessions are pathological. At first, the pathological circuitry dominates and the OCD patient succumbs to the obsessions. With practice, however, the conscious choice to actively exert effort to resist the obsessions and attend to healthier functions activates an alternative circuit. Firing a set of synapses again and again makes them grow stronger. Regular activation of the circuit leads to changes in the neural systems and healthier options. This is how mental force affects the matter in the brain. It alters the wave functions of the atoms that make up the brain’s ions and neurotransmitters.

There is a potential danger to this thinking, however. This is a discussion we have had in this group on many occasions in the past. One can suggest that a person with a mental illness remained sick because of a failure of will. This is a simplistic and false outlook. Sometimes the passive side of the obsession, or any mental illness, is simply too great for any mental force to overcome. Further, it is not will alone but also includes knowledge, training, support from the community and loved ones, and appropriate medical input. For example, retraining stroke patients was unheard of 25 years ago. Retraining today depends on factors that include the severity and placement of the stroke.

Awareness, or attention, a property of the mind, determines the activity of the brain. It enhances the responses of selected neurons while turning down the volume in competing regions. So, if one is attending to color, the parts of the brain that process color are significantly activated by the willful act of focusing on color, while the activity and other brain areas, like smell, are inhibited. Further, it has been seen that mindful awareness to even an automatic task, like breathing, activates the action monitoring circuitry of the prefrontal cortex, that area of the brain involved in the willful selection of self initiated responses. We can willfully act to form a mental image and this will selectively activate the very same area of the brain that actually seeing that image would activate. Willful attention makes neural plasticity possible by rewiring the circuits of the brain.

Schwartz closes his book stating, “But I think the truly important manifestation of will, the one from which our decisions and behaviors flow, is the choice we make about the quality and direction of attentional focus. Mindful or unmindful, wise or unwise––no choice we make is more basic or important than this one.” William James noted that the variety of things we can attend to is determined passively by neural conditions of the brain. However, the amount of attention, after something has caught our mental eye, is determined by active mental processes of the mind. He termed this the “spiritual force.”

                                  Considerations Regarding Consciousness

We have previously speculated on the differences between a Newtonian and quantum paradigm as a means of understanding our existence and the universe. The Newtonian paradigm is consistent with a constancy of time and space, a deterministic universe and the primary significance of matter/energy. God is separate from his creation and is the source of rules by which we live. While the Newtonian paradigm helps us understand the observable, physical universe around us, it is inadequate as an explanation for the building blocks of that universe. The quantum paradigm is more inclusive and helps us understand the building blocks and appreciate the physical universe differently.

Please recall that Einstein's theories of relativity, both special and general, stated the equivalence of mass and energy. Particles came to be seen as manifestations of underlying fields of mass and energy. Space and time came to be understood as relative to an independent observer, making the observer primary and eliminating the constancy of time and space. Quantum notions of complementarity (the notion of particles as points and waves), uncertainty (an inability to define both the place and momentum of a particle at the same time), entanglement and non-locality (shared processes, whereby information is instantaneously exchanged between related particles) further undermine the primary significance of space and time, as we have discussed in previous groups.

Complementarity is exemplified by the slit lamp experiment, which, as you may recall, is at the foundation of quantum physics. The central result of this experiment is that a photon exists as a probability wave of information that includes the probability of finding a particle in any given place at any given time. This probability is known as a superposition, because all possible positions are included in the probability. The photon exists in the superpositions until the probability wave is collapsed by the act of observation. The probability wave becomes a particle, a photon. This is shown to be the case for electrons and ions, as well.

As a result, in the quantum paradigm, the universe is no longer deterministic, but rather based on an infinity of potential (superpositions), that is realized when observed by an observer. Thus, the observer has a creative role but is not the creator. The wave potentials have an independent existence defined by the information that make up the wave potential; the observer is not the source of this information.

To be clear, there are many who are uncomfortable with the significance of the observer. Alternatives to understanding the collapse of the wave function, that is believed to occur in what is known as the Copenhagen interpretation, include the hidden variables alternative and the many universe explanation. The hidden variables notion has been experimentally disproven. The many universe explanation is not amenable to experimental exploration, and cannot be proven or disproven. Rather than a collapse of the wave function, each potential alternative of the wave function breaks off into a new universe, resulting in a plethora of universes every split second.

The exact meaning of the observer is unclear, even in the Copenhagen interpretation. As previously discussed, the Schrödinger's cat paradigm came to represent the Copenhagen interpretation of the collapse of the wave function. You may recall that a cat in a box, containing an apparatus that can kill it, is not theoretically known to be dead or alive until an observer opens the box. It was meant to exemplify the seeming absurdity of the significance of the observer. In fact, the cat could be considered to constitute an observer, though not having human consciousness. Further, you may recall, the paradigm assumes that the experimental materials are quantum in nature, but the observer is not. However, per von Neumann and Stapp, the observer is really a part of the quantum continuum. What, then, constitutes an observer?

I would suggest that consciousness is a part of the definition of an observer. However, consciousness has not proven to be easily defined. One of the problems is that we attempt to define it using the symbols of language, that are dependent on the functioning of the human left cerebral hemisphere.  As we attempt to examine the notion of human consciousness we consciously use human symbols, or language; thus, it seems our understanding of consciousness requires consciousness. As an illustration of this, consider closing your eyes. You wouldn’t say that you are closed; you would say my eyes are closed. Likewise, if you are thinking about thought, the very fact you can think about it means that you are not it. If you can observe and describe it, it is not the core, or real, you.

We cannot be aware of being conscious unless we can observe and think linguistically about being conscious, using the auditory and language functions of the left hemisphere. Consciousness than becomes at least a duality that includes the act of consciousness and it’s observation. However, in examining the brain, it becomes clear that consciousness is much more than a duality. It is, in fact, multifactorial. Consider that not all sensations or information variables have the auditory equivalents required for the use of language. The other senses, limbic system, and right hemisphere of the brain all function independent of the realm of language and, together, exist independently and interdependently in the service of human consciousness. (See R. Joseph, PhD, chapters on the split brain and origins of thought.) Let’s look at some aspects of this.

The first, and easiest to consider, is represented by what is known as “blinsight.” This involves loss of function of parts of the visual cortex that would then render a person functionally blind for a corresponding area of the visual field. This is called a scotoma. People with this kind of loss of vision are consciously unaware of things in that corresponding visual field. However, though consciously unaware, some people can discriminate different types of stimuli, when asked to describe what is not consciously visible. This suggests we may be “conscious” of things beyond our ability to see and consciously label something. This is one reason Colin McGinn has speculated the human mind is incapable of comprehending itself.

Rhawn Joseph, Ph.D., has examined the notion of the split brain in children and adults and believes each side represents a different mind. “The left cerebral hemisphere is classically associated with expressive speech and receptive language, as well as the temporal-sequential, mathematical, analytical, and linguistic aspects of consciousness. The right cerebral hemisphere is dominant over the left in regard to the perception, expression and mediation of almost all aspects of social and emotional functioning, including the recall of emotional memories. Further, the right hemisphere is dominant for most aspects of visual–spatial perceptual functioning, the recognition of faces including friend, loved ones, and one's own face in the mirror. Faces, of course, convey emotion whereas visual–space is related to the environment and the movement and localization of the body in space. Thus, recognition of one's own body and the maintenance of the personal body image is also the dominant realm of the right half of the brain.” You will notice that the right hemisphere is dominant over the left in all aspects of emotion, and this may be related to the increased interconnections the right has with the limbic system. Further, the right hemisphere is thought to be dominant for dreaming. Thus, it seems that each half of the brain is specialized to analyze and perform different tasks, while speaking, if you will, a different language. Each side may not always be able to comprehend what is happening in the other.

There are a few other things to keep in mind as we further explore this topic. The first is that the right and left hemispheres are connected by structures known as the corpus callosum and the anterior commissure. This is how information is communicated between the two hemispheres. Further, the right hemisphere controls the movement of the left hand and is able to indicate when a person is tactually or visually stimulated on the left side. The left hemisphere controls the movement of the right hand and is aware of tactual and visual stimulation on the right side. Much of what we know about split brains comes from people who have undergone complete surgical destruction of the corpus callosum, usually for the treatment of intractable seizures.

Following a callosumotomy, the word “toothbrush” can be presented to a patient, with the word “tooth” falling in the left visual field and the word “brush” falling in the right visual field. The left hand will point to the word viewed by the right cerebrum, “tooth,” and the right hand will point to the word viewed by the left hemisphere, “brush.” Verbally, the left hemisphere will respond “brush” and will deny seeing the word “tooth,” though the right hemisphere was shown to be conscious of the word “tooth.” Further, sometimes the right hemisphere will engage in behavior that the left finds objectionable. One patient experienced putting on clothes with her right hand and pulling them off with her left. Another experienced her right hand placing something in a shopping cart while her left hand put it back. One patient complained that his left hand suddenly struck his wife, much to the embarrassment of his left hemisphere. For some people, the embarrassment leads to the left hemisphere making statements like,” I hate this hand.” Another person found that his left cerebrum wanted to smoke, but his right hemisphere would take the cigarette out of his mouth, obviously disapproving.

This lateralization is also evident for the encoding of memories. The left recalls verbal memories while the right is dominant in regards to visual-spatial, nonverbal and emotional memories. This is the case even in the intact, normal brain. Communication between the two halves occurs via the corpus callosum and memory can be coordinated, but sometimes not. In one study, sodium amytal had been injected into the left carotid arteries to anesthetize the left cerebral hemisphere. After the left cerebrum was inactivated, the right hemisphere was given objects to hold in the left hand. After the left side had recovered, the person was unable to personally recall what had been held, but was able to point to the object with his left hand. The information was inaccessible to the left hemisphere but had been encoded in the right. While some memories may seem to be lost, they are not and can influence functioning.

Childhood memories may be one such example. The corpus callosum remains immature for some time. Full myelination is not completed until the age of 10. Further, different aspects of the left language areas develop at different rates. The language, symbols and associations used by adults are not the same strategies children are able to use. The memories of early childhood precede the development of linguistic labeling ability and involve a nonlinguistic code. Nonverbal information is generally stored in the right hemisphere and emotionally laden memories are more likely to be stored there as well. Much of what is experienced by the young child is unavailable for left hemisphere scrutiny and symbolization. This has led to some speculation that repression is not the main source of the unconscious. The inability of the two sides to communicate completely or accurately results in intra-psychic conflicts for children and adults. Further, there's no way to understand some things like multiple personality using the Freudian model of repression and the unconscious. The notion of a multifactorial basis for consciousness does allow for such an understanding and is consistent with the ideas of F. W. H. Myers and William James, which I will have to discuss at a later time. (This may also be a way of understanding the varieties of paranormal phenomena. See the book “Irreducible Mind,” also to be discussed at a later time.)

Further, because of the limited information exchange between the hemispheres due to the immaturity of a child’s brain, their left hemisphere is much more likely to confabulate, filling in the missing gaps of information from the right side to the left language area (Wernicke’s region), which is trying to make sense of and organize the information it has received. This is the same thing that happens to alcoholics whose left Wernicke’s area has been damaged by alcohol.

The Piagetian concept of ”conservation” (the idea that a tall skinny beaker and a short fat beaker hold the same amount of water poured into each from a common vial) has been demonstrated to relate to a child responding to appearances prior to the development of verbal reasoning. Until the age of 7 or 8, a child does not accurately understand the concept of conservation. However, it has been noted using EEGs that some children understand the concept in the right hemisphere but are unable to transfer this knowledge to the left, which then responds in a confabulatory way. Putting this information into an emotional context by using a reward will result in verbal awareness of conservation for some of these children. This is evidence that children function as though they had split brains.

According to R. Joseph PhD, ”each mental system has its own reality. Each observer is a multiplicity that engages in numerous simultaneous acts of observation. Therefore, nonlocal properties, which do not have an objective existence independent of the act of observation by one mental system, may achieve existence when observed by another mental system. The ‘known’ and the ‘unknown’ can exist simultaneously and interchangeably, and this may explain why we don't experience any macroscopic nonlocal quantum weirdness in our daily lives.” Something observed by one mental system may not be observed by another. An object can be represented in multiple minds in parallel, or separate states as represented by each mental realm individually.

At the very least, any notion of consciousness dependent on left hemisphere symbols and understanding is likely to be most incomplete, even within the limits of an individual human being, as shown above. It also seems presumptuous, in the least, to attempt to define consciousness using left hemisphere symbols, like language. While science and mathematics are our way of understanding the patterns in the observable world, they are largely left hemisphere functions. This is one reason quantum physics is so hard to grasp; it is counterintuitive to the left hemisphere’s way of organizing. Unfortunately, the pedestal on which we have propped language and logic has resulted in an anthropocentric and chauvinistic view of things not deemed scientific or that don’t fit our logic-based norm, like paranormal phenomena. We use words like “pseudoscientific” in a derogatory fashion when describing efforts to meld spiritual with scientific perspectives.

To go one step further, the notion that other forms of consciousness exist for which we have no language and no way of understanding beyond our own human existence may be quite plausible. I think it wise to keep an open mind in regards to the notion of consciousness outside of our existence, especially since we have such an obviously tenuous grasp on this notion. How do we assess consciousness in other forms of life? Might there be forms of consciousness in things beyond our sense of life?

This brings me to one more fascinating possibility. Please remember to keep an open mind. The chapter on Non-locality, Cognition, and Cosmic Structures in the book, “Consciousness and The Universe,” attempts to formulate ways of understanding paranormal phenomena from a quantum perspective, including telepathy, remote viewing or clairvoyance, and precognition. Of particular interest, is the idea of the meaning of virtual particles. Virtual particles pop into and out of existence in perpetuity throughout every nook and cranny of the universe. They are a function of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and the Pauli exclusion principle. Virtual particles may also be another way of saying that the wave nature of a photon comes to predominate over the particle nature (recall the complimentarity of the wave/particle duality in the slit lamp experiments), and, thus, particles are not evident when their wave nature predominates. They pop into our awareness of existence when the particle nature overtakes the wave nature. What I find most curious is the possibility, at least in my mind, that this may be a part of how the universe came to be something from “nothing.” Perhaps, virtual particles, or the predominance of the wave function, were in existence all the “time,” and the physical universe we experience came into existence when the particle nature began to dominate. This would mark the beginning of space/time as the ” big bang.” As suggested earlier, the collapse of the wave function depends on an observer. It has also been suggested that our own consciousness is part of the quantum continuum, not external to the quantum state. Recall we have a creative roll, but we are not the creator. Perhaps the creator and virtual particles are related, just something I find myself considering.

What might this say about an original consciousness? Is this perhaps another way of considering panentheism and our understanding of G(g)od or C(c)reator? The quantum state includes virtual particles. If there are other forms of consciousness, does our individual consciousness add to whatever consciousness exists and, if so, what? We are part of the quantum continuum. Indeed, our existence may be far more than biological. Our evolution and growth may be far more than genetic. Our mind may be far more than brain. We may each have something to add, on an individual basis, to whatever consciousness might be beyond our understanding. Who knows?