The article proposes a new theory of consciousness called "assembly theory," suggesting that consciousness arises not simply from complex arrangements of matter, but from specific combinations of these arrangements, akin to how molecules gain new properties distinct from their constituent atoms. These combinations, termed "assemblies," represent information stored in the structure of molecules, especially within living organisms. The complexity of these assemblies, measurable by their "assembly index," correlates with the level of consciousness. This theory proposes that higher levels of consciousness require more complex and diverse assemblies, implying consciousness could exist in varying degrees across different systems, not just biological ones. It offers a potentially testable framework for identifying and quantifying consciousness through analyzing the complexity of molecular structures and their interactions.
Terence Tao argues against overly simplistic solutions to complex societal problems, using the analogy of a chaotic system. He points out that in such systems, small initial changes can lead to vastly different outcomes, making prediction difficult. Therefore, approaches focusing on a single "root cause" or a "one size fits all" solution are likely to be ineffective. Instead, he advocates for a more nuanced, adaptive approach, acknowledging the inherent complexity and embracing diverse, localized solutions that can be adjusted as the situation evolves. He suggests that relying on rigid, centralized planning is often counterproductive, preferring a more decentralized, experimental approach where local actors can respond to specific circumstances.
Hacker News users discussed Terence Tao's exploration of using complex numbers to simplify differential equations, particularly focusing on the example of a forced damped harmonic oscillator. Several commenters appreciated the elegance and power of using complex exponentials to represent oscillations, highlighting how this approach simplifies calculations and provides a more intuitive understanding of phase shifts and resonance. Some pointed out the broader applicability of complex numbers in physics and engineering, mentioning uses in electrical circuits, quantum mechanics, and signal processing. A few users discussed the pedagogical implications, suggesting that introducing complex numbers earlier in physics education could be beneficial. The thread also touched upon the abstract nature of complex numbers and the initial difficulty some students face in grasping their utility.
The blog post explores the potential of applying "quantitative mereology," the study of parts and wholes with numerical measures, to complex systems. It argues that traditional physics, focusing on fundamental particles and forces, struggles to capture the emergent properties of complex systems. Instead, a mereological approach could offer a complementary perspective by quantifying relationships between parts and wholes across different scales, providing insights into how these systems function and evolve. This involves defining measures of "wholeness" based on concepts like integration, differentiation, and organization, potentially leading to new mathematical tools and models for understanding emergent phenomena in areas like biology, economics, and social systems. The author uses the example of entropy to illustrate how a mereological view might reinterpret existing physical concepts, suggesting entropy as a measure of the distribution of energy across a system's parts rather than purely as disorder.
HN users discussed the practicality and philosophical implications of applying mereology (the study of parts and wholes) to complex systems. Some expressed skepticism about quantifying mereology, questioning the usefulness of assigning numerical values to part-whole relationships, especially in fields like biology. Others were more receptive, suggesting potential applications in areas like network analysis and systems engineering. The debate touched on the inherent complexity of defining "parts" and "wholes" in different contexts, and whether a purely reductionist approach using mereology could capture emergent properties. Some commenters also drew parallels to other frameworks like category theory and information theory as potentially more suitable tools for understanding complex systems. Finally, there was discussion of the challenge of reconciling discrete, measurable components with the continuous nature of many real-world phenomena.
Summary of Comments ( 3 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43181520
Hacker News users discuss the "Integrated Information Theory" (IIT) of consciousness proposed in the article, expressing significant skepticism. Several commenters find the theory overly complex and question its practical applicability and testability. Some argue it conflates correlation with causation, suggesting IIT merely describes the complexity of systems rather than explaining consciousness. The high degree of abstraction and lack of concrete predictions are also criticized. A few commenters offer alternative perspectives, suggesting consciousness might be a fundamental property, or referencing other theories like predictive processing. Overall, the prevailing sentiment is one of doubt regarding IIT's validity and usefulness as a model of consciousness.
The Hacker News post titled "A New Proposal for How Mind Emerges from Matter" linking to a Noema Magazine article has generated a moderate number of comments, many of which express skepticism or critique the core ideas presented in the article. Several commenters find the proposition vague and lacking in concrete scientific grounding.
One recurring theme in the comments is the perceived lack of a clear definition of "mind" or "consciousness." Commenters point out that without a rigorous definition, it's difficult to evaluate the claims made in the article. They argue that the article relies heavily on philosophical concepts without offering a concrete mechanism for how these concepts translate to physical processes in the brain.
Several commenters critique the article's use of the term "integrated information theory" (IIT). Some argue that IIT, while intriguing, hasn't yet produced empirically testable predictions and therefore remains speculative. Others suggest that IIT might be a sophisticated way of restating the hard problem of consciousness without actually offering a solution.
Some comments express frustration with what they see as a trend of philosophical musings masquerading as scientific breakthroughs in the field of consciousness research. They call for more emphasis on empirical research and less on abstract theorizing.
A few commenters engage with the article's core ideas more directly, suggesting alternative perspectives on the relationship between mind and matter. One commenter proposes that consciousness might be an emergent property of complex systems, similar to how wetness emerges from the interaction of water molecules. Another commenter argues that focusing solely on the brain might be too narrow a perspective, and that consciousness might involve a broader interaction with the environment.
While some express a degree of interest in the article's proposition, the overall tone of the comments is one of cautious skepticism. Many commenters express a desire for more scientific rigor and less philosophical speculation in discussions about the nature of consciousness. They emphasize the need for testable hypotheses and empirical evidence to move the field forward. No single comment emerges as overwhelmingly compelling, but the collective sentiment emphasizes the need for greater clarity and scientific grounding in this complex area of inquiry.