Synaptic hypercomputation: Hype or reality ?

[tkadm30]

Dopamine and serotonin are essential monoaminergic neurotransmitters implicated in the neuromodulation of the subconscious system.

 

The pharmacological regulation of dopamine and serotonin via cannabinoids (THC) administration may enhance synaptic hypercomputation (SH), a novel neurocomputational mecanism to access the subconscious system on-demand.

 

Accessing the subconscious system through synaptic hypercomputation is probably relevant to monoaminergic connectivity and schizophrenia. Furthermore, dopamine disconnectivity has been implicated in the pathology of schizophrenia.

 

However, the relationship between schizophrenia and synaptic connectivity is poorly understood. Could cannabinoids be used as part of an antipsychotic treatment for enhancing interneuronal synaptic connectivity ?

 

 

[Strange]

The pharmacological regulation of dopamine and serotonin via cannabinoids (THC) administration may enhance synaptic hypercomputation (SH), a novel neurocomputational mecanism to access the subconscious system on-demand.

 

 

The only references to "synaptic hypercomputation" that I can find are your forum posts on the subject. (And someone by the name of Etienne Robillard posting almost identical comments.) So is there any evidence that such a mechanism exists?

[tkadm30]

 

 

The only references to "synaptic hypercomputation" that I can find are your forum posts on the subject. (And someone by the name of Etienne Robillard posting almost identical comments.) So is there any evidence that such a mechanism exists?

 

It has been reported that "critical systems often exhibit optimal computational properties", so the emergence of biological hypercomputation in living organisms may not be so uncommon.

 

http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnsys.2014.00166/full

[Strange]

Do you have any evidence that "hypercomputation" exists? In biological systems or elsewhere?

[tkadm30]

Biological hypercomputation occurs in photosynthetic systems, so I guess it's naive to think the human brain do not have this capacity.

[Strange]

Biological hypercomputation occurs in photosynthetic systems

 

 

Citation needed.

[tkadm30]

 

The quantum oscillations of the DVB molecules were transmitted to the other bilin molecules

in nthe complex, at distances 20 Angstr¨oms apart, as if these molecules were connected

by springs. The authors of [19], therefore, suggested that distant molecules within the

photosynthetic proteins are ‘entangled’ together by quantum coherence (“coherently wired”

is the used terminology) for more efficient light harvesting in marine algae. In other

words, by exploiting such correlations, the biological cell ‘quantum calculates’ – within the

decoherence time scale (3) – which is the most efficient way and path to transport energy across

macroscopically large distances of order of a few nm (path optimization). Some authors would

interpret this behaviour as a prototype of ‘quantum computation’, although personally I believe

we are rather far from rigorously demonstrating this.

 

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/329/1/012026/pdf

[DrmDoc]

Dopamine and serotonin are essential monoaminergic neurotransmitters implicated in the neuromodulation of the subconscious system.

 

The pharmacological regulation of dopamine and serotonin via cannabinoids (THC) administration may enhance synaptic hypercomputation (SH), a novel neurocomputational mecanism to access the subconscious system on-demand.

 

Accessing the subconscious system through synaptic hypercomputation is probably relevant to monoaminergic connectivity and schizophrenia. Furthermore, dopamine disconnectivity has been implicated in the pathology of schizophrenia.

 

However, the relationship between schizophrenia and synaptic connectivity is poorly understood. Could cannabinoids be used as part of an antipsychotic treatment for enhancing interneuronal synaptic connectivity ?

 

 

 

To answer your question, I've reviewed your citation link, subsequent links, and the pharmacology of THC. If I understand correctly, "synaptic hypercomputation" regards the quantum electrodynamics in microtubules, which involves the quantum efficiency at which energy and signals could be transferred between photosynthetic cells. A further review of the relevant links show that this perspective involves marine algae and not human cells; however, this subsequent link speculates on the photoelectric nature of human neurons. As your subsequent quote provides, "we are rather far from rigorously demonstrating" the conclusions in the articles supplied by your link. There is not enough evidence, in my opinion, for the type of quantum hyper-connectivity these articles suggests.

 

In answer to your cannabis question, THC is a cannabinoid receptor type 1 agonist, which acts to inhibit neuronal excitability. Therefore, cannabis is contraindicated for enhanced inter-neuronal connectivity as its effects appear to diminish neuronal activity rather than enhance that activity. I hope this helps.

[wtf]

To the best of my knowledge, hypercomputation refers to carrying out infinitely many steps of a computation in finite time.

 

Hypercomputation is an abstract concept. It's inconsistent with the laws of physics as they are currently known.

 

We know from history that tomorrow's physics will refine and even overthrow today's. So it's always possible that some future genius will find a way to do hypercomputations in a physical device.

 

Until that day, hypercomputation is a purely theoretical or abstract idea. Of course it's still a very interesting and useful idea.

 

But unless the OP has some different meaning of hypercomputation in mind, it's not possible that our brain carries out hypercomputation, since our brain is subject to the laws of physics.

 

I would only add that "The pharmacological regulation of dopamine and serotonin via cannabinoids (THC) administration may enhance synaptic hypercomputation" sounds like a fine bit of late night stoner philosophy from back in the day.

Edited December 27, 2016 by wtf

[StringJunky]

To the best of my knowledge, hypercomputation refers to carrying out infinitely many steps of a computation in finite time.

 

Hypercomputation is an abstract concept. It's inconsistent with the laws of physics as they are currently known.

 

We know from history that tomorrow's physics will refine and even overthrow today's. So it's always possible that some future genius will find a way to do hypercomputations in a physical device.

 

Until that day, hypercomputation is a purely theoretical or abstract idea. Of course it's still a very interesting and useful idea.

 

But unless the OP has some different meaning of hypercomputation in mind, it's not possible that our brain carries out hypercomputation, since our brain is subject to the laws of physics.

 

I would only add that "The pharmacological regulation of dopamine and serotonin via cannabinoids (THC) administration may enhance synaptic hypercomputation" sounds like a fine bit of late night stoner philosophy from back in the day.

In one word: B*ll***s.

[Strange]

 

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/329/1/012026/pdf

 

 

Yep. There is evidence that quantum effects are significant in certain complex molecules.

 

But that doesn't appear to answer the question about "hypercomputation", which is an entirely hypothetical concept that hasn't even been shown to exist in principle, never mind claiming that it exists in reality.

[tkadm30]

 

To answer your question, I've reviewed your citation link, subsequent links, and the pharmacology of THC. If I understand correctly, "synaptic hypercomputation" regards the quantum electrodynamics in microtubules, which involves the quantum efficiency at which energy and signals could be transferred between photosynthetic cells. A further review of the relevant links show that this perspective involves marine algae and not human cells; however, this subsequent link speculates on the photoelectric nature of human neurons. As your subsequent quote provides, "we are rather far from rigorously demonstrating" the conclusions in the articles supplied by your link. There is not enough evidence, in my opinion, for the type of quantum hyper-connectivity these articles suggests.

 

In answer to your cannabis question, THC is a cannabinoid receptor type 1 agonist, which acts to inhibit neuronal excitability. Therefore, cannabis is contraindicated for enhanced inter-neuronal connectivity as its effects appear to diminish neuronal activity rather than enhance that activity. I hope this helps.

 

Thank you for your reply. I would like to clarify a few points:

 

Since THC administration is known to enhance functional neurogenesis, I believe neural plasticity (connectivity) is increased through dopaminergic activation of the subconscious system.

 

I argue that "synaptic hypercomputation" may result from increased dopaminergic connectivity during synapse formation (neurogenesis).

 

The relationship between the subconscious mind, brain connectivity, and hypercomputation could be related to the (hyper)computational capacity of dopaminergic neurons to modulate emotionality and creativity. Hence, it is well known that dopamine neurotransmission is implicated in the modulation of learning and encoding of (new) memories.

 

The synaptic hypercomputation model propose a functional interplay between neurogenesis and interneuronal connectivity through endocannabinoid-mediated quantum processing of the subconscious system.

Edited December 27, 2016 by tkadm30

[Strange]

 

I argue that "synaptic hypercomputation" may result from increased dopaminergic connectivity during synapse formation (neurogenesis).

 

 

Then you need to provide evidence that (a) "synaptic hypercomputation" exists and (b) that is the cause.

 

But, as you haven't yet provided any evidence that hyper computation exists, maybe you should start there before getting on to neurology.

[DrmDoc]

 

Thank you for your reply. I would like to clarify a few points:

 

Since THC administration is known to enhance functional neurogenesis, I believe neural plasticity (connectivity) is increased through dopaminergic activation of the subconscious system.

You may have to review your sources or references supporting your perspective for THC efficacy in neurogenesis because current research suggests that there is insufficient reliable evidence to reach such a conclusion. Although THC is known to be effective in treating the symptoms of neurodegenerative diseases such as multiple sclerosis, it is not known that such efficacy is a result of neurogenesis. Indeed, THC has been shown to moderately increase dopamine production initially, which primarily acts on the pleasure pathways of the brain; however, dopamine production and sensitivity has been shown to decreases with long-term or heavy use of THC. Dopamine, at low therapeutic levels, is known to increase mental acuity; however, higher levels of dopamine are also known to cause "cognitive deficits." Therefore, enhancing dopamine production will likely have a deleterious affect on the quality you're investigating.

 

If I understand correctly, your interest is in the "subconscious systems" of the brain and their activation. Depending on your interpretation of the term subconscious, all neural activity in the brain could be perceived as occurring below the threshold of our conscious awareness. However, if your terms and usage is to reference a specific functional distinction in the cognitive activity of our brain's activations, I think that distinction is more aptly described and referenced by our use of the term unconscious. Functional distinctions in our brain's cognitive activity regard observable and testable distinctions in the nature and output of brain function. Empirically, our brain produces just two overall functional states supported by observable and testable distinctions: conscious and unconscious. These two distinctions envelop the overall cognitive nature and output of brain function. If your interest specifically regards enhancing the distinction of unconscious brain function, then we can proceed from here with a clearer understanding of that distinction. It's important to understand that whether we are discussing conscious or unconscious brain function both states involve the same neurotransmitters.

Edited December 27, 2016 by DrmDoc

[tkadm30]

You may have to review your sources or references supporting your perspective for THC efficacy in neurogenesis because current research suggests that there is insufficient reliable evidence to reach such a conclusion. Although THC is known to be effective in treating the symptoms of neurodegenerative diseases such as multiple sclerosis, it is not known that such efficacy is a result of neurogenesis. Indeed, THC has been shown to moderately increase dopamine production initially, which primarily acts on the pleasure pathways of the brain; however, dopamine production and sensitivity has been shown to decreases with long-term or heavy use of THC. Dopamine, at low therapeutic levels, is known to increase mental acuity; however, higher levels of dopamine are also known to cause "cognitive deficits." Therefore, enhancing dopamine production will likely have a deleterious affect on the quality you're investigating.

 

If I understand correctly, your interest is in the "subconscious systems" of the brain and their activation. Depending on your interpretation of the term subconscious, all neural activity in the brain could be perceived as occurring below the threshold of our conscious awareness. However, if your terms and usage is to reference a specific functional distinction in the cognitive activity of our brain's activations, I think that distinction is more aptly described and referenced by our use of the term unconscious. Functional distinctions in our brain's cognitive activity regard observable and testable distinctions in the nature and output of brain function. Empirically, our brain produces just two overall functional states supported by observable and testable distinctions: conscious and unconscious. These two distinctions envelop the overall cognitive nature and output of brain function. If your interest specifically regards enhancing the distinction of unconscious brain function, then we can proceed from here with a clearer understanding of that distinction. It's important to understand that whether we are discussing conscious or unconscious brain function both states involve the same neurotransmitters.

 

Here's a famous study which demonstrated the efficacy of exogenous cannabinoids (ie: THC) in promoting hippocampal neurogenesis. Furthermore, the subconscious system is the prime residency of essential psychological qualities of the mind: creativity, volition, and saliency. I argue that the pharmacological activation of the subconscious system via THC enhance dopaminergic neurotransmission and thereby facilitate optimal computation of consciousness through synaptic activity.

Edited December 27, 2016 by tkadm30

[Strange]

I argue that the pharmacological activation of the subconscious system via THC enhance dopaminergic neurotransmission and thereby facilitate optimal computation of consciousness through synaptic activity.

 

 

Unsupported assertions do not make a compelling argument.

[DrmDoc]

 

Here's a famous study which demonstrated the efficacy of exogenous cannabinoids (ie: THC) in promoting hippocampal neurogenesis. Furthermore, the subconscious system is the prime residency of essential psychological qualities of the mind: creativity, volition, and saliency. I argue that the pharmacological activation of the subconscious system via THC enhance dopaminergic neurotransmission and thereby facilitate optimal computation of consciousness through synaptic activity.

 

I've reviewed the study link you've provided. That link is to an article reporting the findings in rat brain studies of HU210 effects, which is a synthetic substance "100 to 800 times more potent than natural THC." You should note this distinction because HU210 isn't the THC or natural substance you perceive as a promoter of neurogenesis. The chemical composition of these substances is not the same and, therefore, their neurological effects sharply differ. Although HU210 likely supports but not induce neurogenesis, THC, according to its pharmacology, "has a relatively low cannabinoid receptor efficacy and affinity", which prominently suggests the improbability that THC promotes neurogenesis. You should also consider that neurogenesis involves additional processes beyond dopaminergic neurotransmission and that those processes may be more essential than dopamine.

 

Although some of us believe otherwise, subconscious is a misnomer for that distinctive state of brain function from which aspects of our psychology arise. Our brain does not produce a separate subconscious state of observable activity but does, however, produce a distinctive unconscious state of activity that we can observe as dreaming. Dreaming is an unconscious, rather than subconscious, state of brain activity suggesting mentation or thought processes in sleep. Unconscious, relative to the cognitive processes of brain function, describes that state of brain activation and mentation that is directly opposite of our brain's conscious functional state. Unconscious is more descriptive of that state of brain function and mentation that is not directed by conscious awareness. Subconscious is more descriptive of a type of influence mentation produces and a path of influence relative to that mentation. Interestingly, the distinctions between conscious and unconscious brain function and mentation is clearly defined by universal distinctions in cortical activation between our brain's waking and dreaming state.

[tkadm30]

 

I've reviewed the study link you've provided. That link is to an article reporting the findings in rat brain studies of HU210 effects, which is a synthetic substance "100 to 800 times more potent than natural THC." You should note this distinction because HU210 isn't the THC or natural substance you perceive as a promoter of neurogenesis. The chemical composition of these substances is not the same and, therefore, their neurological effects sharply differ. Although HU210 likely supports but not induce neurogenesis, THC, according to its pharmacology, "has a relatively low cannabinoid receptor efficacy and affinity", which prominently suggests the improbability that THC promotes neurogenesis. You should also consider that neurogenesis involves additional processes beyond dopaminergic neurotransmission and that those processes may be more essential than dopamine.

 

Although some of us believe otherwise, subconscious is a misnomer for that distinctive state of brain function from which aspects of our psychology arise. Our brain does not produce a separate subconscious state of observable activity but does, however, produce a distinctive unconscious state of activity that we can observe as dreaming. Dreaming is an unconscious, rather than subconscious, state of brain activity suggesting mentation or thought processes in sleep. Unconscious, relative to the cognitive processes of brain function, describes that state of brain activation and mentation that is directly opposite of our brain's conscious functional state. Unconscious is more descriptive of that state of brain function and mentation that is not directed by conscious awareness. Subconscious is more descriptive of a type of influence mentation produces and a path of influence relative to that mentation. Interestingly, the distinctions between conscious and unconscious brain function and mentation is clearly defined by universal distinctions in cortical activation between our brain's waking and dreaming state.

 

Great post. I agree that HU210 is a synthetic cannabinoid and that THC regulation of neurogenesis is controversial. Dopamine neurotransmission is critical to optimal computation of the subconscious system by regulation of neural synchronicity.

 

Is (functional) neurogenesis in the frontal lobe correlated to enhanced dopaminergic activity ?

 

Is neural synchronicity correlated to enhanced dopaminergic computation of saliency, creativity, etc ?

 

Neural synchronicity is poorly understood. Dopamine neurotransmission may increase perceptual saliency and creativity through optimal computation of the subconscious system. (aka neural synchronicity)

 

Neural synchronicity and transport of calcium efflux in brain is evidence of synaptic hypercomputation.

 

 

 

eViL StOner

Edited December 28, 2016 by tkadm30

[DrmDoc]

 

Great post. I agree that HU210 is a synthetic cannabinoid and that THC regulation of neurogenesis is controversial. Dopamine neurotransmission is critical to optimal computation of the subconscious system by regulation of neural synchronicity.

 

Is (functional) neurogenesis in the frontal lobe correlated to enhanced dopaminergic activity ?

 

Is neural synchronicity correlated to enhanced dopaminergic computation of saliency, creativity, etc ?

 

Neural synchronicity is poorly understood. Dopamine neurotransmission may increase perceptual saliency and creativity through optimal computation of the subconscious system. (aka neural synchronicity)

 

Neural synchronicity and transport of calcium efflux in brain is evidence of synaptic hypercomputation.

 

 

 

eViL StOner

 

Your interest, if I understand correctly, is in what substances act to enhance the speed of neuronal processes. Specifically, you're interest involves enhancement of those processes that occur below the threshold of conscious where you believe salient qualities of mind originate. You may what to consider that the brain system you call subconscious is not distinguishable in the way you believe or is capable of being enhanced as you imagined. Subconscious, for example, is not a distinctive state of brain activity that is distinguishable by brain structure or function as is the unconscious, which is disguisable by the dreaming state of brain function. Subconscious, without a distinguishable target, cannot be enhanced. Also, the neural circuitry of the brain is a closed system of concurrent processes whose functional output is determined by several factors you may not clearly grasp. For example, creativity involves a confluence of brain activity functionally indistinguishable as either conscious or unconscious because both activities employ the same neural circuitry. You should note that prefrontal function does indeed contribute significantly to the innovative or creative quality of our conscious mental processes; however, believing that its functional contributions are exclusively to one path of mentation would be a mistake.

[tkadm30]

 

Your interest, if I understand correctly, is in what substances act to enhance the speed of neuronal processes. Specifically, you're interest involves enhancement of those processes that occur below the threshold of conscious where you believe salient qualities of mind originate. You may what to consider that the brain system you call subconscious is not distinguishable in the way you believe or is capable of being enhanced as you imagined. Subconscious, for example, is not a distinctive state of brain activity that is distinguishable by brain structure or function as is the unconscious, which is disguisable by the dreaming state of brain function. Subconscious, without a distinguishable target, cannot be enhanced. Also, the neural circuitry of the brain is a closed system of concurrent processes whose functional output is determined by several factors you may not clearly grasp. For example, creativity involves a confluence of brain activity functionally indistinguishable as either conscious or unconscious because both activities employ the same neural circuitry. You should note that prefrontal function does indeed contribute significantly to the innovative or creative quality of our conscious mental processes; however, believing that its functional contributions are exclusively to one path of mentation would be a mistake.

 

Thanks for your reply.

 

Neuronal synchronicity is evidence of synaptic hypercomputation: The biological mecanism which drives our synaptic potential to acquire salient informations through the subconscious system. (perceptual interface)

 

The frontal lobe is home of creativity and activation of intracellular CB1 receptors in this area promote cerebral blood flow (CBF) for optimal computation of conscious activity.

 

I believe it is illogical to reduce the brain bioelectromagnetic field to a closed system: Experimental evidences put forward the model of neuronal hypercomputation

as a emerging property of living systems were electromagnetic signals can interfere, manipulate, and regulate the synchronicity of neuronal activity.

[DrmDoc]

 

Thanks for your reply.

 

Neuronal synchronicity is evidence of synaptic hypercomputation: The biological mecanism which drives our synaptic potential to acquire salient informations through the subconscious system. (perceptual interface)

 

The frontal lobe is home of creativity and activation of intracellular CB1 receptors in this area promote cerebral blood flow (CBF) for optimal computation of conscious activity.

 

I believe it is illogical to reduce the brain bioelectromagnetic field to a closed system: Experimental evidences put forward the model of neuronal hypercomputation

as a emerging property of living systems were electromagnetic signals can interfere, manipulate, and regulate the synchronicity of neuronal activity.

 

Neuronal synchronicity, as I understand, is a theoretical "correlate of consciousness" and regards the "simultaneous oscillation of membrane potentials in a network of neurons." Essentially, as I perceive, it regards the synchronous neuro-electrical communication between neurons that is believed to be representative of those neural activations associated with mentation and cognitive activity within the brain. My impression of your idea of "synaptic hyper-computation" is that it regards the hyper-connectivity or enhanced speed at which neurons and neuronal groups could potentially communicate. If my impression is correct, your interest appears to involve enhancing either the processing speed or power of that neuronal group or system from which you believe salient mental qualities arise. It's your understanding, I believe, that prefrontal function identifies where those salient qualities originate. However, it isn't quite that simple.

 

All qualities of the mind, which includes creativity and saliency, arise from a confluence of brain activity that cannot be distinguished by a singular cognitive system (e.g., subconscious) nor by the singular functional output of a specific lobe (e.g., prefrontal). A more refine understanding of our brain's functional confluence may be necessary to your perspective before proceeding further. For example, no cortical activity arises--spontaneously or otherwise--without a neural connection to subcortical brain structure (e.g., classic experiment). This decorticate outcome suggests the depth of dependency of cortical function, including its prefrontal, on subcortical input. Further still, there are more neural relays from the cortex to subcortical structure than there are subcortical relays (e.g., thalamus) to the cortex. This aligns with the dependency of cortical function on subcortical input. Essentially, this suggests that creativity and saliency also requires something provided elsewhere in the brain; therefore, enhancing one brain area without consideration of others may not be as productive as desired. Further, you may want to consider the already researched deleterious effects of enhanced or increased prefrontal activity. For example, there is some evidence of an association between hyperfrontal activity and certain mental disorders.

 

Indeed, the circuitry of our brain functions as a closed system of perceptual and thought processes distinctly separate from other systems and isolated by both physiological and neurological boundaries.

Edited December 29, 2016 by DrmDoc

[tkadm30]

 

Neuronal synchronicity, as I understand, is a theoretical "correlate of consciousness" and regards the "simultaneous oscillation of membrane potentials in a network of neurons." Essentially, as I perceive, it regards the synchronous neuro-electrical communication between neurons that is believed to be representative of those neural activations associated with mentation and cognitive activity within the brain. My impression of your idea of "synaptic hyper-computation" is that it regards the hyper-connectivity or enhanced speed at which neurons and neuronal groups could potentially communicate. If my impression is correct, your interest appears to involve enhancing either the processing speed or power of that neuronal group or system from which you believe salient mental qualities arise. It's your understanding, I believe, that prefrontal function identifies where those salient qualities originate. However, it isn't quite that simple.

 

All qualities of the mind, which includes creativity and saliency, arise from a confluence of brain activity that cannot be distinguished by a singular cognitive system (e.g., subconscious) nor by the singular functional output of a specific lobe (e.g., prefrontal). A more refine understanding of our brain's functional confluence may be necessary to your perspective before proceeding further. For example, no cortical activity arises--spontaneously or otherwise--without a neural connection to subcortical brain structure (e.g., classic experiment). This decorticate outcome suggests the depth of dependency of cortical function, including its prefrontal, on subcortical input. Further still, there are more neural relays from the cortex to subcortical structure than there are subcortical relays (e.g., thalamus) to the cortex. This aligns with the dependency of cortical function on subcortical input. Essentially, this suggests that creativity and saliency also requires something provided elsewhere in the brain; therefore, enhancing one brain area without consideration of others may not be as productive as desired. Further, you may want to consider the already researched deleterious effects of enhanced or increased prefrontal activity. For example, there is some evidence of an association between hyperfrontal activity and certain mental disorders.

 

Indeed, the circuitry of our brain functions as a closed system of perceptual and thought processes distinctly separate from other systems and isolated by both physiological and neurological boundaries.

 

This is highly interesting stuff.

 

Notes:

 

-The non-local activation of brain-to-brain interconnectivity may be a key feature of synaptic hypercomputation.

- Interneuronal quantum coherence in microtubules is also critical for optimal dopaminergic computation of the subconscious system.

- Calcium-dependent activation of corticostriatal pathways may regulates dopamine functional connectivity.

- The brain is not the source of consciousness... (open systems)

Edited December 30, 2016 by tkadm30

[DrmDoc]

-The non-local activation of brain-to-brain interconnectivity may be a key feature of synaptic hypercomputation.

 

"Non-local activation of brain-to-brain interconnectivity" reads, IMO, as highly speculative and before we proceed any further, you need to clarify your idea of "synaptic hypercomputation", evidence for its existence and/or what specific functional (mentation, behavioral, physiological, etc.) effects or output it regards.

 

- Interneuronal quantum coherence in microtubules is also critical for optimal dopaminergic computation of the subconscious system.

 

I'm not sure what you're suggesting here. Dopamine isn't the sole or primary medium for communication between neurons. Also, dopamine isn't specifically known to originate, induce, or carry computational data between neurons.

 

- Calcium-dependent activation of corticostriatal pathways may regulates dopamine functional connectivity.

 

As you may be aware, dopamine isn't the only medium of connectivity between neurons. Dopamine is just one of several neurotransmitters that, when balanced, jointly produce the mental and behavioral output of normal brain function. Again, the effects of increased dopamine production may not produce the enhanced neuronal or mental effects you expect or believe. From the link:

 

Disruption to the dopamine system has also been strongly linked to psychosis and schizophrenia. Dopamine neurons in the mesolimbic pathway are particularly associated with these conditions. This is partly due to the discovery of a class of drugs called the phenothiazines (which block D2 dopamine receptors) which can reduce psychotic symptoms, and partly due to the finding that drugs such as amphetamine and cocaine (which are known to greatly increase dopamine levels) can cause psychosis when used in excess. Because of this, all modern antipsychotic medication is designed to block dopamine function to varying degrees.

 

 

- The brain is not the source of consciousness... (open systems)

 

A while ago, some of us engaged this idea as a topic of Speculation. It's highly speculative and you should probably post your thoughts on this idea in that forum.

Edited December 30, 2016 by DrmDoc

[wtf]

Neuronal synchronicity is evidence of synaptic hypercomputation:

How do you define hypercomputation? Do you mean performing infinitely many computations in finite time? Or models of computation that go beyond the Church-Turing thesis? It would be helpful to know what you mean by that word.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypercomputation

Edited December 31, 2016 by wtf

[tkadm30]

How do you define hypercomputation? Do you mean performing infinitely many computations in finite time? Or models of computation that go beyond the Church-Turing thesis? It would be helpful to know what you mean by that word.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypercomputation

 

I define "biological hypercomputation" as the outputs of synchronicity in living systems. All living (cellular and unicellular) organisms are essentially conscious entities and salient beings: The quantum phase coherence of neural synchronicity (in microtubules) may control phasic dopamine exocytosis. (Dopamine is a neuromodulator of saliency as opposed to a excitatory or inhibitory neurotransmitter)

 

"Hypercomputation" is a broad term which may refer both to neuronal (synaptic) hypercomputation and quantum-like hypercomputation. Quantum-like hypercomputation is best described as the near-instant computation of non-classical Turing machines by quantum computers. Synaptic hypercomputation, however, is an attempt to understand how neural synchronicity is implicated in the quantum-like wavefunction of synaptic dopamine exocytosis.

Edited December 31, 2016 by tkadm30