Conclusivity of Consciousness

Consciousness is basically a process of memory access. To be conscious of any given factor, is to access memory data of that factor, simultaneously to accessing data of the interaction of that factor with other factors.

Different aspects of consciousness might be: conscious perception, conscious awareness, self-consciousness, and conscious thought.

“Conscious perception” could be considered to be conscious of any given particular factor. Simultaneous memory access is what allows a “conscious” perception of the factor, and the relevance and implications of the factor’s existence. The noted factor, can be a variety of things, including objects, groups or categories of objects, concepts, or at the most basic and generic level, datum. The minimum required information for consciousness, would be information data  labelled however it may be, with the factor being 1 unit of data, and the interaction being how that datum reacts with another unit of data.

“Self-consciousness” could be considered, an individual being conscious of themself. The factor of which they are accessing within memory data, would be themself (and whatever they perceive themself to consist of, as saved in their memory data). The interaction of the factor (themself) would be the causes and effects of the existence of themselves, and how their existence relates to their surroundings (or whichever perception they have saved in memory data, of the settings regarding their presence).

“Conscious awareness” could be considered, being continuously conscious of a concept. One difference of definition from “perception”, could be the requirement of continuous simultaneous memory access. As long as the individual sustains memory access to the factor and interaction of that factor, for a minimal period, the ongoing memory access could be considered awareness. Awareness could perhaps be of any given concept, but the most general intention of the term, is likely that of: the individual being consciously aware of the concept that they are capable of using thought, and that they are using it at the present time.

“Conscious thought” could be considered the process of continuous memory access, and the circulation through saved memory data. Circulation through memory data is done by using the conscious process of simultaneous data access of any factor and the interaction of that factor, combined with sustained memory access, and a method to access an alternate factor within the overall memory data. A trigger method is required to allow differing factors to be accessed, and to guide which new factor within the memory, is accessed. The trigger method is the match or resemblance of one factor to another. With enough memory data, any factor or resemblance of the factor would be found multiple times, and as sustained memory access occurs, a differing factor or interaction of the same factor can be sequentially accessed. With humans, the factors are often distinguished by words which are saved as memory data, which resemble different pieces of memory data which was input to the brain via senses.

For a memory system to be capable of effectively being conscious of new general data, it needs to have a function of perceiving the interaction of any factors of data it receives (so that its able to access the data of the factor as well as its interaction). To perceive the interaction of general data, the memory system need to be able to match any factor, to different accounts of that factors interaction with other factors. With a massive amount of received data (such as humans receive, typically), it could take excessive time to sort through all matches of a factor and perceive its interaction, and to determine the next factor to be accessed. Feedback triggers can be added, to regard certain factors, or sub-constructs of factors, or their interaction, as useful or not. This groups data, saving time.

Humans have developed a conscious thought method, capable of processing general data which is input to the brain's memory system. The general data is received by the senses, and often saved with a feedback trigger which indicates relevance of that information data. Humans feedback triggers were developed to regard different sensory memories of encounters with their environment, to be helpful or harmful to their survival.

All that being said, what are the benefits of the comprehension and understanding of the methods of consciousness?

By analysing consciousness, the methods of intellectual distinguishment of factors, and the interaction and reaction of factors within a concept, can be determined. Consciousness and therein intelligence, could be significantly beneficial, if understood and potentially more effectively utilised. Once the process of: comprehension of factors within a concept, is understood, the process can be applied to all concepts and factors encountered throughout life. The effective process can be applied to any problem, to then cause the most preferable outcome, by more accurately adjusting factors (as the cause and effect of which is comprehended and saved as memory), and resolve problems.

Understanding the process of consciousness is potentially, understanding the root of human thought and intelligence. Just like the process of consciousness itself, if it can be comprehended, then the cause and effect of the concept can be applied more effectively to more appropriate circumstances. Considering it is the method of virtually all interactions of us as humans, and the potential method of which any decision is made by an individual capable of conscious thought, this could be the most relevant, beneficial, and widely applicable concept to ever be understood!

General Data Consciousness

How is consciousness adaptable, to be used for general circumstances?

Assuming consciousness of any concept is basically, accessing memory data of the overall factors involved in the concept, while simultaneously accessing memory data of the interaction of those factors, then how can consciousness be adaptable to its environment?

It seems like it should be fairly simple, that for an individual to be capable of being conscious of varying concepts within a changing environment, they just need to have a method of gaining new data of its environment, into its memory storage. As long as the entity can acquire new data of its environment, it should then be able to access that data from its memory, and access data involving the interaction of factors, within the overall data. But what function allows the ability to distinguish the interaction of factors within data?

The entity which is being adaptively conscious, must also have the capability of comparing the data which it is acquiring. If it can compare the data, and distinguish factors of the data which match or resemble, then it should be able to save new sub-constructs of data of the differing interactions of the different factors within the overall data. The sub-constructs are necessary, in order to be conscious of the interaction of the factors.

In order to distinguish the interaction, it can use the matched data, which indicates the cause and effect of the factor. The potentially conscious entity can determine the factors effect, based on the most common result of interaction with an alternate factor (found in its matched data). Or, to determine the cause of a factor, search the data for the matched factor, and find the most common combination of alternate factors which cause it.

For eg. if comprehending the interaction (effect in this case) of factor X, the individual would access memory data of all matches of X. In some memory data, X + Y = Z, and in other memory data, X + M = Z, therefore, the most probably effect of interaction of factor X, is Z. So a sub-construct is saved of X combined with any factor, has the effect of Z as a result. This is the method of adaptably comprehending the interaction of any factor on a basic level, using memory data.

This is a very generic explanation of the method which a conscious entity comprehends, and is conscious of, any given concept within a set of data that it acquires. The most basic required functions for adaptable consciousness, are acquiring data, distinguishing matches of factors, distinguishing interaction of factors (within the data), and then accessing the data of the factors, simultaneously to accessing data of the interaction of that factor.

With these enabled functions, any-one or -thing should be capable of being conscious of any general data.

Formula For Feedback

What is the formula for positive and negative feedback triggers?

As humans, we subjectively perceive virtually everything we encounter throughout life, as some degree of positive or negative. Most (or maybe all?) of the cause of those positive and negative triggers was assumedly developed by evolution and natural selection, based on beneficiality to the survival of the species. But what allows certain mechanisms in the brain to be perceived as positive or negative?

Theoretically, objectively, nothing in this universe is fundamentally positive or negative. Everything is relative, including positive or negative, good or bad. So, to cause an organic brain to perceive something as positive, it must use objective programming of information which the brain perceives, since nature doesn’t come with a designated positive and negative feedback trigger. Without an element which is fundamentally positive, the programming would have to create a reaction which simply signals that, those factors of data should occur again (for positive), or a signal that those factors should not occur again (negative).

As it would likely develop, programming of the organism would have random mutations, and (as natural selection would have it) the surviving organisms would be ones with programming which triggers the organism to repeat (positive feedback) the circumstances which allow it to survive. As animals develop to be more complex, in order to match their environment, they would develop more complex and effective trigger systems, with the programming of repeat circumstances, or do not, sub programmed.

It seems animals developed a sub-program of “do repeat” (positive) reaction to certain chemicals (such as dopamine) and “do not repeat” (negative) reaction. This allows all of that species to then indeed have a default built-in positive or negative trigger. With the built in triggers, adaptation to environment would be much faster and therefore more survivable. Without built in subprograms of “repeat” or “do not”, to act as positive and negative triggers, the organisms would have to acquire random mutation programming of repeat or do not, for each individual circumstance which the species comes across. The programming of repeat or not for each set of circumstances, would be more complex programming than “activate this chemical”. Therefore making a universal positive/negative trigger chemical would be more effective, as random mutations to trigger the chemical would be more likely to occur, than mutations of “repeat these certain circumstances of this sensory data input”.

So even from the perspective of any organism, the only cause of the interpretation of something being positive or negative, is theoretically only programming, which developed to trigger that individual organism to either repeat the circumstances or do not repeat.

If pain is only a conflict of information input, which triggers signal to not repeat, is it so “bad”? Can it be consciously overwritten?

Would it be as bad as causing pain, to create a computer with trigger programming of “do not repeat”, and causing that trigger to continuously repeat?

AC (Artificial Consciousness)

Based on the concept that consciousness is basically a method of memory access, how would the process of the concept of consciousness, be replicated artificially?

My hypothesised explanation of human consciousness is virtually: a system involving sensory input, memory data, and access of such data, by method of circulation of memory data involving conceptual constructs, which are relative to the function, cause, and effects of data which is simultaneously being circulated. Human consciousness was developed based on positive/negative feedback, relative to the benefit of the individual, and resultingly, circulated memory data is accessed via trigger of this feedback.

This concept should be theoretically replicable into artificial technological conditions.

To break down and convert each aspect of my definition of human consciousness, the first part would be sensory input. Sensory input is necessary to gain new data which the individual might typically encounter, and to then be aware of future surroundings, to apply learned data relative to resembling variables, and therein cause a preferred outcome. This aspect of consciousness might only be necessary to program a general AI, which is capable of interacting with its environment, and accomplishing general tasks involved with its environment. Sensory input is likely not required for basic consciousness, since data can be acquired by skipping the process of senses. The required data for consciousness could potentially be downloaded directly.

Memory data in general is fairly simple, and already programmed and downloaded into computers as of today. The plausible difference between memory data which computers already have, and memory data required for consciousness, might be interpretation of the data. Humans interpret data mostly with a system of terminology to label most specific factors within data, as well as label concepts containing numerous factors, and label generalisations of factors (variables) to allow interpretable categories of factors (which in themselves have factors which alter their cause and effect). This system of labels allows much more accurate memory of cause and effect of virtually all factors and elements, which make up general data.

Without interpretation, the memory data cannot be distinguished and applied to future circumstances, to cause alteration to factors and potentially a preferable outcome. Alteration to factors in future circumstances, also isn’t necessarily required for basic consciousness, but is a potentially profound and significant advantageous effect.

Interpretation of data, is necessary for conscious perception though, because consciousness requires concepts (compounds of factors) to be saved in memory data, for memory of outcome of interaction between factors. Effective organisation and categorisation of memory data is required to some degree of labellisation, in order for interpretation of concepts -relative to memory data which is being circulated-  to be allowed. Data is fundamentally labelled to some degree, since data itself, is the organisation of a recording of occurrences. But the more accurately that data is labelled, the more interpretable it is, and most importantly, the more able the data is relatable, from one factor of data to another. But, current computers have this potential capability of interpreting data, or interpreting the result of interaction between 2 factors of the data. There is potentially something additional, which computers are lacking, for effective conscious perception or conscious thought.

.

The difference may very well be the method of simultaneous access to the memory data. Coming back to my initial definition of human consciousness, this part: “cause, and effects of data which is simultaneously being circulated”, in basic terms, refers to accessing data of 1 factor, simultaneously to accessing data of the result of that factors interaction with another factor. Theoretically, both elements of data could be accessed simultaneously and instantly, but without method of circulation of data, triggering alternate elements of data, the concept of conscious perception of that factor, would only occur for a brief period (as long as both elements of data are being accessed), and unlikely to occur in the 1st place (without specific intentional occurrence).

So, with the simple adjustment to computers data access, of allowing simultaneous access to a factor and the outcome of interaction of that factor, that computer would theoretically be consciously perceptive of that factor. A simple example could be a calculator, which is programmed with memory data of all digits (factors), plus certain mathematical interactional outcomes between the digits. If the calculator was programmed to access data of a digit (say the # 1), simultaneously to accessing the data of the outcome of interaction of that digit with another digit (say, 1+2=3), the calculator would be consciously perceptive of the number 1 within the context of that equation.

-

This consciously perceptive calculator could theoretically be given the ability for conscious thought as well, on a very basic level. If the calculator was given this already mentioned ability to access data of a factor simultaneously to data of the interaction of that factor, but to access data continuously, and with a triggering mechanism, to access alternate data (which it has saved) which has a resemblance to the data currently being accessed, then the calculator would be consciously thinking. If the calculator was programmed with a triggering mechanism, which causes its access of data to transfer to an alternate factor (saved within its data), based on match of digit (basis of priority of factor matched and accessed, could vary), it could create a “memory circulation”.

For eg., it could be started with the digit 1 (factor), then the programmed triggering mechanism causes it to simultaneously access an equation (factor construct of the outcome of interaction) involving the 1, maybe 1+4=5, then while accessing the equation, its data access transfers to access another digit (simultaneously to accessing the equation), maybe 5, then transfers to access an alternate equation involving the 5, maybe 6x5=30, then accesses the digit 30, then another equation involving 30, and so on (continuously accessing at least 2 factors of data simultaneously (the digit and the equation), circulating through its data).

This process would theoretically and virtually, be a basic form of artificial conscious thought.

Conscious Thought & Perception

• Some degree of interpretation is required to allow consciousness, since access of memory data of the interpretation of the concepts involved with the particular memory data which is being accessed simultaneously, is what causes the in depth sense of consciousness. But the simplest and most basic form of consciousness can be generalised to: accessing memory data of a factor, simultaneously to accessing memory data of the outcome of the interaction of that factor with another factor. This would be a basic form of interpretation and concept (memory that 1 factor combined with another has a result).
• 
  
• So, if a computer is given an elaborate, significant, and accurate labelling system of all data which is downloaded to it, this will allow the potential to save memory data of concepts which make up the data, including cause and effect of the interaction of different factors within the data. If the computer is enabled to simultaneously and continuously access memory data, then it should be able to access memory data of the concept (involving cause and effect, or effective reaction of interaction between the particular factor and other factors, within the data), and memory data of the particular factor itself, simultaneously, causing the perception of consciousness. 
• 
  
• “Conscious thought” (regarded as different from conscious perception) requires circulation of memory access and a triggering mechanism, to actively access new memory data, which in some way resembles the previously accessed memory. Conscious thought is a circuit of conscious perceptions. In order to access new memory data in the process of conscious thought, conscious perception of one factor leads to another factor (since, in conscious perception, the memory data of the outcome of the interaction of 2 factors is accessed). This is the link enabling 1 memory to lead to another, in conscious thought. 
• 
  
• The ability to access multiple memories simultaneously, as well as the ability for 1 memory to trigger another memory (memory circulation), is what allows conscious perception (memory of the outcome of interaction between 2 factors). 
• 
  
• With this circulation of, memory access of 1 factor triggering simultaneous memory access of another factor of resemblance, someone is able to access sequential memories with “conscious thought”, and furthermore they are able to comprehend reaction of factors with “conscious perception”.
• 
  
• Whichever factors within memory are being accessed, dictates what the mind is consciously perceptive of. 
• A memory system can have conscious perception of something as basic as 1 + 2 = 3. 
• The system accesses memories of data labelled as 1, 2, 3 [Factors 1,2,3], 
• simultaneously to memories of the outcome [Interaction]
• 
  
• The “Interaction” can be generalised into a concept, allowing variables of those factors to be used. Once a generalised concept is saved, it can be used with any variance of factors. 
• In order to generalise the “interaction”, the concept of the effect of each factor, on the outcome, needs to be saved as memory.  
• 
  
• In this eg. the generalised concept which applies to the “Interaction”, would be addition (ie. adding another of an object increases the total by that amount). The concept of addition can be extracted from the concept of the effect of 1, on the outcome of 3. The concept of the effect of 1, would be that X (any variable) +1 causes an outcome of the 2nd factor increased by 1. Once this concept is extracted, any factor can replace the 2 in the eg, and the outcome can be determined. 
• 
  
• A more complex eg. of Conscious Perception, using a generalised concept to determine the outcome, would be conscious perception of a rocks existence. 
• The memory system (mind in this case) accesses memory data (recorded via visual sense) labelled “rock” [Factor 1], 
• simultaneously to accessing memory data of the concept of existence [Factor 2] (ie. concept in itself of relative physical presence, rather than not), 
• and memory of the generalised concept of interaction [Interaction]. (ie. outcome of an object (X variable) + existence, causes an outcome of the objects existence), to allow an outcome of the rocks existence [Factor 3] to be consciously perceived.
• 
  
• For conscious perception of the outcome of self awareness, replace the rock with the individual themselves, who is accessing the memories.
• So it would seem, conscious perception can be applied to virtually any scenario, only requiring memory access to the data involved in that scenario. This conscious perception is a fundamental piece of the framework allowing circulation and flow of memories by means of conscious thought.

Efficient Ease of Numerous Neurons

• What is the most effective and efficient construction of a preferred assembly, by method of accessing tools within a toolbox?
• Tools within the toolbox include: memories of factors (including objects (or physical elements) and motion of objects), and memories of concepts (including virtual sub-constructs of numerous factors). 
• 
  
• Accuracy of -reference of resemblance of memory data- (for one thing) should be beneficial, allowing a more accurate and preferred assembly (or cause of preferred outcome of a set of circumstances). Once a memory is matched, greater accuracy of the data which is accessed, should prove to be beneficial for predicting an outcome, of which is preferable to cause. But accuracy can only help with memories which are saved, so quantity of memories should be necessary for use of accuracy, in circumstances involving a vast quantity of variables, and concepts therein. 
• 
  
• But even with high accuracy of memory data recall, and a high quantity of memories available to match, the brain still requires access to the numerous memories (of which it might then recall accurately). Without ease of access to memories, the brain could still be in a subconscious state, accessing only few memories (even if a high quantity available, and vivid recall of which). 
• 
  
• For ease of accessing a matching memory to current circumstances, the brain must have open access passageways. Considering the seeming method of the organic human brain, and its relevant developed process of memory access, when the brain has easy access, via more open neural passageways (each of which, physically leads to a memory), by mathematical probability, the brain uses each individual neural passageway less often, if the same number of neurons are used. Potentially, as a result of less usage of individual neural passageways, incidentally that memory would be less accurately recalled. 
• 
  
• It seems likely, as animal subconscious gradually developed into human conscious thought, more memories became easier to access from less severe triggering (linked, positive or negative feedback chemicals) required to access the memories. With more memories being accessed easily enough, each individual memory was therefore accessed less often, unless an increased number of neurons began to fire, in order to maintain connecting to each memory as often as before, while still accessing other memories more easily. This seems likely to be the case, as it is probably evident that humans fire a higher quantity of neurons than animals, and this would allow sustenance of accuracy of memory recollection, without the reduction of use of neural passageways.  
• 
  
• So as a result of easier access to more memories, the brain likely increased the number of neurons which fire, and memory capacity as well, in order to maintain a higher accuracy of memory recall, to assist the higher quantity of memories which are being accessed more easily. With a high enough quantity of memories being accessed more easily, compounds of memories are then also saved as a memory. These compounds are the sub-constructs of factors which we “comprehend”. With the ability to save compound memories, comes an exponential increase of quantity of memories to be accessed, with the potential to make a significant amount of combinations using all memory data of factors.
• 
  
• With so many memories for potential access, for the most efficient method of access, the brain would need to develop the most effective balance of: ease of access of a higher quantity of various memories, vs accuracy of recall (by means of recurring access), using the present physically maximum quantity of neurons. With a hypothetical limit to quantity of neurons to fire, the brain can either access a higher quantity of memories more easily with less accuracy of recall (as a result of fewer recurrences of the neuron using that passageway), or access fewer memories with higher accuracy of recall.
• 
  
• In the general scenario, for which memory is required, of fewer factors and possible variables, a high recall accuracy seems as though it would be more beneficial -as long as the number of neurons is relatively sufficient in ratio to the number of factors to be potentially saved as memory. 
• Whereas in a scenario where a vast quantity of potential variables and complex circumstances are present, it seems ease of access to more memories (to meet the ratio, in relation to potential variables and concepts) would be most effective.
• 
  
• This theory seems to suggest, a requirement cause of the natural development of higher intelligence, is a complex environment with a wide scope of variables demanding a higher quantity of potential memory data.

Comprehension Inception

• If conscious thought is simply memory access, what elements of that concept allow comprehension and intelligence?
• If “intelligence” is regarded as [effective and accurate conclusions drawn from relative variables], then likely, the more accurately and effectively memories of factors are processed, derived, combined, and applied to new varying circumstances, via comprehension, the higher the intelligence level. 
• 
  
• Taking subconscious reaction compared to conscious decisions, as a sample for variances of accuracy of memory access in relation to respective intelligence levels, it seems evident that the more accurate the memory processing, the higher the intelligence. Regarding subconscious reaction as a low-accuracy method of general and basic memory, triggering reactions, there is little intelligence involved in comparison. This method may be faster, but much less effective with high variances in circumstances requiring analysis for accurate prediction. 
• 
  
• The conscious decision process allows access to a profoundly higher quantity of memories with much easier triggering of access to subsequent memories. In any circumstance requiring reaction, conscious decision making is able to take in the variables of the current circumstance, and reference vast amounts of memory data which is relative to those individual variables. Rather than taking the overall circumstances and choosing the most pressing memory based on memory data, with linked severity of positive or negative feedback (as subconscious would have), conscious thought can relate all specific detailed factors involved in the overall circumstance, and access the most accurate memory relative to each factor/variable. With the circumstances dissected, and each specific detail which is involved, referenced to various matching memory data of that detail, a much more accurate and reliable prediction can be made, and therein preferable outcome caused.
• 
  
• As far as specific details of factors within circumstances go, in order to effectively relate the most relevant aspect of memory data, comprehension of cause and effect of varying factors can make the relating of memory data much more effective. But what is comprehension, if all thought is just memory access? Comprehension would be memory of a sub-construct of objects/factors and relative cause and effect, of those factors (and or motion thereof). With a memory of an appropriate sub-construct of factors (and cause/effect of such factors), this sub-construct (comprehension) can be applied to various circumstances containing matching factors within the virtual construct. 
• 
  
• In order to comprehend various general concepts, the mind must be able to remember specific factors (objects/groups of objects/motion thereof) and their relative cause and effect. The more concepts stored in memory (and the more effectively a mind can access those concepts), the more efficient the variances of circumstances can be related, and therein accurately predicted. Vast quantities of factors, and concepts of factors, can be stored in the memory, creating a more effective toolbox for finding the most relative selection of tools to build what is preferred.