Book review: “Putting Ourselves Back Into the Equation” by George Moser

Science journalist George Moser attempts to answer some of these questions in his book “Bringing ourselves back into the equation: Why physicists are studying human consciousness and artificial intelligence to uncover the secrets of the universeHe brought together a wide range of insights from developments in artificial intelligence, unorthodox explanations of modern physics, and philosophies of science and mind, and interviewed many of the scientists and philosophers behind these theories. His conclusion? We cannot understand what consciousness is without understanding its basic laws. For physics; or, depending on who you ask, the opposite.

The book is organized around two main topics: neural networks and quantum mechanics. Neural networks are inspired by simplified models of animal brains. Like a brain, a neural network consists of neurons (or nodes) and a dense network of connections between them. The inner layers of such networks, when large enough, constitute the site of “deep learning,” where increasingly complex information is collected and assimilated. This is also the site where consciousness (whether human or not) might emerge, some suggest. How the physical brain gives rise to mental experience is one of the great mysteries in science, and it is not clear whether neural networks will get us much closer to solving this question. In fact, many doubt that it can be solved at all or that anything exists to Solution. But neural networks at least give philosophers and scientists a new opportunity to solve an old problem. It may also have some practical uses in the near future, as in understanding the symptoms of schizophrenia, for example, or in determining whether robots should have rights.

This biologist wants us to find comfort in the complexity of our world

The second part, which is the most important part of the book, is devoted to the basic laws of physics, especially quantum mechanics, and their relationship to human consciousness. Here, Moser broaches a fascinating array of topics, including quantum gravity, causality, statistical mechanics, personal identity, free will, and why not? – Reality itself. Oof.

Few theories in science are as powerful or successful as quantum mechanics. We owe it to computers, smartphones, GPS, MRI and much more. But it is also unlike any other theory known to science. At his feet, our intuition and imagination – trained by our senses and constrained by our experience – begin to unravel. Why? Because all it does is give us an equation and tell us that if we solve it, we can find the probability of a certain event occurring. What he won’t tell us is what will It is happening; Worse still, it puts a mathematical limit on how much we can know from experiments.

Most physicists accept all this, and after decades of experiments and observations, fearfully believe that this lack of certainty reflects an inherent randomness in nature. For some, this is unacceptable. The theory must be incomplete. Surely we are missing something – another force, some hidden variable. (All the evidence we have suggests this is highly unlikely.) Others point out that every time we perform an experiment, we get a result, not a probability. So, how does pre-measurement probability “collapse” into post-measurement certainty? Where does this happen? The answer, according to some prominent names in physics, is consciousness.

“THE MANIAC” blends fantasy and history at the edge of reason

It’s certainly a stretch to assert that a fundamental law of physics requires a human mind to make it work, but Moser examines three theories that claim it. The first, proposed by John von Neumann and Eugene Wigner, pioneers in the field, says that in the process of measurement, consciousness “forces” nature to take a stand. In this case, I, the observer, “cause” the outcome, eliminating the entire range of possibilities to arrive at a single outcome with just my attention. But this is only possible if by consciousness we mean an immaterial force that can “act” on physical matter. In other words, a kind of telekinesis. The second, proposed by Roger Penrose, a Nobel Prize winner for his research into general relativity and black holes, asserts that it is not human consciousness that influences quantum behavior, but rather the opposite: quantum systems, operating inside neurons, give rise to it. to her. Most physicists don’t think this is plausible, because quantum behavior is too fast and too small to operate at the level of neurons—plus, it still doesn’t explain how subatomic behavior could lead to a unified mental experience. Finally, there is the many-worlds interpretation of quantum theory, about which there is no shortage of animated videos on YouTube, and whose claims about consciousness are so confusing and contradictory that I can only hope that a version of me exists in another world where the world is. Theory and filmSliding doors,” does not exist.

It is to Moser’s great credit that he takes these theories seriously and presents them sympathetically. But the book is both so spread out and densely packed that the reader will find it difficult to keep track of where he is at any given point, and how this or that idea is relevant to the larger purpose of the book. Moreover, because the book relies heavily on personal interviews, Moser often seems too deferential to his subjects to be more objective about their theories. He is quick to explain the few objections he raises; Little contradictory evidence was presented; The sheer absurdity of some of the claims is that it conveys nothing. One does not come away from the book with a clear sense of what is plausible and what is strange, what is or is not supported by evidence, and what is the scientific consensus on the relationship between quantum mechanics and consciousness. I imagine most neuroscientists and physicists would say that the two have nothing to do with each other; The laws of physics and brain biology operate at different levels and at different scales. However, if the popularity of the many-worlds interpretation is any indication, it is that this interpretation will not capture the public imagination.

It seems to me that there is a fundamental human need to see ourselves as having a unique place in the universe, and to believe that our consciousness is exceptional to the point of being outside the known laws of physics. At the same time, we feel deeply uncomfortable with the idea that human knowledge may have limits or that we may not have the means to overcome those limits. Both sentiments are evident throughout the book. It also lies at the heart of the deep contradiction between one group of ideas in it and another. On the one hand, if the laws of physics require, or imply, the uniqueness of human consciousness, then there can be no possibility of consciousness in artificial intelligence; On the other hand, if neural networks indicate that consciousness is not limited to humans, and can extend to artificial intelligence, then quantum mechanics should be independent of the human mind. So what is it?

“Our minds,” Moser writes in his conclusion, “evolved to understand the world, which requires that the world be understood.” But we evolved to survive in this world, not necessarily to understand it. This is the limitation that artificial intelligence threatens to expose: not only may our robotic friends be conscious, but the depth of their consciousness, and their ability to know, may far exceed our own. At the same time, quantum mechanics confronts us with the possibility that the ultimate nature of reality, including the nature of our consciousness, will remain hidden from us forever. Perhaps this is why the idea of ​​marrying a great person unknown to others is so attractive. It allows us to maintain hope that we are special, that we can know everything, and that we are special because we can know everything.

Bringing ourselves back into the equation

Why are physicists studying human consciousness and artificial intelligence to uncover the secrets of the universe?

Farrar, Strauss, and Giroux. 321 pp. $30