F. POSSIBILITY OF EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION
In 1985, I came up with the following very sketchy proposals for possible experimental proofs or demonstrations of Duplication Theory. At the time I concluded that the then current technology was not advanced enough to implement these requirements, but maybe now things have moved on enough and the complex circuits I proposed then should now be capable of construction, and implementation along the lines suggested. More crucially in May 2008 I came across an experiment conducted in the
Above is the title of this paper describing an experiment conducted by a group led by Prof. Rita Pizzi of the department of Information technologies,
“In recent times the interest for quantum models of brain activity has rapidly grown. The Penrose-Hameroff model assumes that microtubules inside neurons are responsible for quantum computation inside the brain. Several experiments seem to indicate that EPR-like correlations are possible at the biological level. In the past year very intensive experimental work about this project has been done at DiBit Labs in
The Experiment
The experiment is described in a power point presentation on the quantum mind made in Salzburg 2007 (see http://www.dti.unimi.it/~pizzi/ppt%20Salzburg.html) What they did was to insert multi electrode arrays (MEAs) into two separate bowls of human neuron cultures, ensuring that they were electronically shielded by a double opaque Faraday cage. A laser is connected up to one of the basins which is subjected to both bursts of electrical pulses (e.g. 40Hz 1 impulses for 300 ms) and laser stimulations (e.g. 1 ms pulses for 100 ms or 3 seconds). The signals from both MEAs were recorded and it was found that there was a cross correlation and coherence during both electrical and laser stimulations, suggesting similar behaviours between the two MEAs.
The same experiments were carried out with three bowls inside the one Faraday cage using MEAs connected to neurons, and controls: madrigel and culture liquid, and also just culture liquid, with the neurons stimulated by a laser (Madrigel is a chemically defined mammalian cell culture medium that supports maintenance and long term clonal growth of mammalian cells.). The two non neuron MEA bowls were contained again within more Faraday cages. The result was that the laser pulse aroused a simultaneous spike of activity only in the neural basin. The same process was carried out with light from a LED source which produced no such effect.
In order to check whether there was any vestige of interference from within the Faraday cages, an antenna was introduced therein and connected to a very sensitive spectrum analyzer, but no activity was detected during the laser pulses. Even more surprising was that when the laser was substituted with a dummy load simulating an equivalent current absorption, the same peaks of activity in the neural MEA were detected, but not when the LED source was substituted with a dummy load.
Conclusions made by the Pizzi team
It was concluded that the phenomenon was not due to the laser itself but to an electromagnetic field emanating from the laser supply circuit, even though this field was too small to be detected by their instruments. A further conclusion was that neurons appear to receive and amplify a signal whose value through the air, measured with a filar antenna, and before reaching the Faraday cage, is under 2mV (the sensitivity of their oscilloscope). This was despite the fact that in order to cause an action potential (spike) a neuron needs to be stimulated inside the cell with a 30 mV pulse. Further more in measuring the intensity of electromagnetic fields a Gauss meter was used with a sensitivity threshold of 70 uG. The laser supply circuit when turned on, generated in the vicinity of the Gauss meter around .002G, but when the Gauss meter was moved away beyond 30 cm the field intensity is below that detectable by the Gauss meter, and during the experiments the laser circuit was at least 50 cm distant
Possible Variations on the Pizzi experiment to demonstrate other effects suggested by Duplication Theory
A reconciliation of the Pizzi paper and the results anticipated by Duplication Theory is conveniently demonstrated by setting out below a shortened version of my orignal paper written in 1985 proposing experiments for verification, from which the similarity of my predictions 20 years ago can be discerned with the 2004 experiment. But before I do that I will first describe another version of the Pizzi experment which should produce a result anticipated by Duplication Theory which might otherwise appear anomalous.
Using the same equipment as above the first and most obviously required variation must be to place the two separate bowls of neurons apart in separate rooms so that there is absolutely no chance of the second bowl receiving EM signals from the laser stimulating the first bowl. The amount of distance apart might first be at different ends of a building and then much further if results continue to be positive. Duplication Theory (DT) does not necessarily predict a strong connection in the latter instance although it would be a not improbable result if the two separate sets of neurons were cultured from the same source: indeed this latter would be a distinct requirement for DT to be manifested.
DT does however indicate the following might transpire: If the neurons were subjected to by a very complex pattern of bitmap stimulations by laser at very regular intervals, and this was done for, say, a number of hours, or possibly a number of days, then if the same neurons were left in the same location there might be a resonance effect detectable if the system were then stimulated by just the initial part of the laser signal so that the neurons, once instigated into some from of resonance, would continue to produce the same varied response as was engendered by the laser’s original continuing action.
Different lengths of time and different frequencies of laser and different patterns of bitmaps would need to be tried, but there should be some resonance effect experienced according to the Hypothesis set out by DT. If so, then this could not easily be justified by anything known in established scientific knowledge. The experiments that I suggested in 1985 as described below are based on this premise, but at the time there was no possibility of which I was aware that a sufficiently small and complex electronic circuit was available to produce such a resonance effect, but the use of a neural culture connected up to a multi electrode array must come quite close to this, and hopefully close enough to be able to register such an effect. The reason why there is also a simultaneous transmission effect is more difficult for me to justify other than to note that wherever one sort of resonance effect exists, it is always accompanied by a small degree of its corollary effect. In other words because no structure resonating with itself through time in one location to sustain a degree of inertia and permanence through time, no such structure can remain absolutely motionless since its component particles will be never be absolutely fixed but exhibiting some degree of motion. Thus, there will be some radiation (time duplication effect) emitted from the neurons stimulated by the first neurons which however small, and undetectable by instruments, might just be enough at near quantum levels to instigate a similar and simultaneous reaction by the second bowl of neurons.
Indeed once set in motion the second set might need no further volition from any external source to continue the pattern of the first if the latter had been set in a continuous pattern of stimulation for quite some time before hand.
To demonstrate how providential the Pizzi paper is for my own work, I have set out below a shortened version of my original proposals from 1985 which, if they could have been carried out at the time would have demonstrated the validity of Duplication Theory. Of course there was nothing then of which I was aware that was complex or sophisticated in the way of electrical circuits that were likely to be flexible and sensitive enough to demonstrate the required resonance effect through time. But the electronic stimulation of neurons would appear to be a possible answer, and a godsend as a possible proof for my proposals, and something for which I have been waiting for a couple of decades. From jaundiced experience I am prepared for the distinct possibility that the results I anticipate might not be forthcoming, but given the fact that the results produced thus far by the Pizzi group are inexplicably anomalous, I consider there is a reasonable chance that further variations on this experimental theme would clarify matters considerably.
AMENDED AND CURTAILED VERSIONS OF ORIGINAL PAPER FROM 1985 ON EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION
Elements required for operation of duplication effects
It has already been noted in earlier sections that the greater the amount of complexity of structure and hence the greater degree of space duplication, the greater will be the resonance effect through time. Similarly, the time duplication effect is best observed when vast numbers of similar events take place together in a short space of time in one location. It was noted that this occurs most obviously in the flow of electric current, in that the similar actions of billions of identical electrons are involved, making the phenomena of time duplication very easily observable in the form of electromagnetic transmission. However the postulated space duplication effect is not so apparent, and in order to demonstrate the validity of the theory, it is vital to be able to perform some experimental evidence of this resonance through time.
What is therefore required are a very large number of duplications of similar structures, with such duplication preferably carried out in short intervals of time. Therefore, if some electrically based experiment could be devised involving large numbers of highly structured electronic patterns, the desired effect should become observable. The difficulty is that, as has already been mentioned, electrons are virtually mass less and very energetic and hence hard to pin down to formal structures with large amounts of precise interval duplications.
(In the original paper of 1985 I scheduled out a series of examples of differing ways of presenting increasingly structured alternating currents, using complex aerials or microchip circuits being rapidly spun in centrifuges. The first examples were far too basic and primitive to stand much chance of showing any structure resonance effect, and I have not bothered to rehearse them giving only the more sophisticated examples below given more or less in their original form. However the fundamental rationale of the experiment has not changed and is as follows)
If in some way an electrical circuit, highly complex down to molecular level, could be devised and then was fed a very regular instigating and structured signal such as a saw tooth wave so that the circuit fired repeatedly in the same manner at a high frequency, Duplication Theory indicates that there should be a potential for electronic circuit, and in particular its three dimensional structure to resonate on in the same location even when the instigating signal had been turned off. Such an effect could perhaps be exaggerated if the original circuit was left turned on and off at very regular intervals, so that the saw tooth signal at high frequency was left to run for a micro second and then turned off and then on again and so on at a high and very regular rate.
The way in which this resonance might be detected is hard to predict other than to say that if the circuit was left firing for some time, say 30 seconds (or possibly much longer than that), in one location then when turned off there might be a detectable potential for the same complex circuit left in exactly the same location, to repeat itself. If nothing was initially apparent then perhaps a very short burst of signal could be turned on and sharply cut of before it had run its full sequence, to see whether the circuit continued to reproduce the original full sequence. In other words it might resonate on, or show some potential to do so after a short later burst of signal had again been.
Early Proposals for Experiments
1. Micro chips circuits in Centrifuge
One of the ways in which I visualized in 1985 this might be demonstrated was to contain a number of complex microchip circuits embedded into the periphery of a small centrifuge, and then feed the same complex alternating current into all the chip circuits simultaneously in phase with the revolution rate of the centrifuge (see fig 1). Then, at a later time, revolve the centrifuge, without the current turned on, to see if a vestigial resonance current could be detected. I suggested the effect might be more pronounce of the whole system were super cooled.
2. Interconnected Microchip circuits
I then suggested that it would be desirable to dispose of the clumsy mechanism of physical movement if possible, and perhaps this could be done by setting up some sort of highly complex circuit of chips all connected to an alternating current so that each chip was charged and then discharged simultaneously at very regular, very frequent intervals (see fig 2).
3. Hierarchies of connected microchip circuits
A further degree of complexity could be added connecting up each chip not only with the saw tooth AC source but also with each other, as far as is possible, so that each chip would perhaps take a number of pulses of AC before it reached the required level for it to discharge, and when it did, it would disperse its fired charge among the surrounding other chip circuits which would then fire in turn or come closer to firing (see fig 3). There would thus be a regular cascade effect of firing chip circuits in regular patterns.
4. Similarity to synapse firings and interconnected neurons
If this system of discharges growing in complexity as the firing moves away from the source of AC (see fig 4) were kept regularly cascading outwards by the instigation of a regular saw toothed AC, then here would be a very complex system whose pattern of motion of electrons would be duplicated very regularly in a highly complex spatial pattern. The structure of interlinked discharging chip circuits might be seen to bear some similarity with the way in which the neurons in the brain are connected via the regularly discharging synapses to clusters of other neurons via a web of dendrites and axons. The similarity is intentional, since as already explained, the memory function of the brain in part depends on the complexity and pattern of interconnection of the neurons to produce a resonance effect through time: the recall of memory. The alternating saw tooth current should be turned on and off at regular intervals, say every two seconds, and then a very sensitive detection system used whereby it might perceive whether the system continued to resonate: that is, continue to produce similar patterns of electron flow during the cut off period. Orthodox beliefs indicate this should not occur. The whole system could be perhaps be operated at very low temperatures for superconductivity
5. Randomly instigated circuits
If the system proposed above in 4 could be made to fire randomly instead of being instigated by a regularly alternating current, then here would be a closed approximation of the way in which this paper speculates that the memory part of the brain operates. This would be difficult to arrange and no suggestions are put up here other than to mention that possibly some sort of mechanism based on the Schmidt box or random event generator (REG) might be necessary to be able to impose a random firing system. Perhaps it would be possible through induction by an externally controlled magnetic field, and it would be important that this imposition could be exercised with a very minimum of force. Then the REG would be turned off and instead a fixed pattern of firing re-imposed again at regular intervals. This externally imposed pattern should also contain a short sequence of movement as in 4 above, and it should be left to run undisturbed in surroundings, for a long time, possibly weeks or months. Thereafter, a variation should be imposed: the pattern should be imposed by only for the first instant of imposition, so that the whole sequence of pattern movement is not played out. The neutral random state is then allowed to prevail. If duplication theory is correct, then the former change in pattern flow should be duplicated, even after the external field has been cut off.
6. Two simultaneous similar experiments
This experiment and all the others above could be improved by duplicating each experiment by another identical piece of equipment, simultaneously in another identical room, so that they are run two at a time, side by side. Once the experiment has been running for some time, the operation of one system is altered as described above, and the other left running regularly. The resonance effect might be more pronounced since the theory indicates that not only is there a potential for resonance to occur in one location through time, but if there was another system operating in similar circumstances and surroundings elsewhere, preferably many miles away, then that, relatively speaking could be described as the same location. Obviously, the possibility of ordinary electromagnetic induction between the two systems would have to be guarded against.
7. Ionised particles Variation on 6
A possible simpler variation on 6 would be to arrange a gas cloud of ionised particles so that their random motion could be observed with the minimum of disturbance resulting from such observation. The perceivable Brownian motion would hopefully by fairly close to perfect random motion. An externally controlled electric field should then be exercised to impose near stationary order and pattern onto the charged particles, and then this field altered slightly as described above to produce a shift in the pattern, then here is a variation of 6 which should not be too difficult to set up.
8. Queries
There is one problem in most of these proposals that needs consideration. From where does the energy come to keep these systems oscillating, once the external ordered field has been turned off? This first answer is one already mentioned in section B as the inherent energy of all small particles: the continuing action in Brownian motion is directed and employed to emulate the order of previous patterns due to the fact that by doing so, they maintain a lower energy level or more stable state. However, an alternative possible explanation is at hand. The regular firing of all the circuits in the above experiments will produce detectable degrees of electromagnetic field, radiating outwards at light velocity, so that there will be some work done by the oscillating charges, presumably from change of rate of velocity. It might be that not all this work done will be converted into normal electromagnetic radiation (the time duplication effect): some of it might tend to be dispersed through time in that one location relative to the same surroundings.
9. Hollow sphere test
To test this a further simple experiment at once suggests itself. If an oscillating charge source were placed inside a hollow conductor sphere so that all the energy transmitted to the sphere through instantaneous induction could be measured, there might turn out to be a tiny shortfall indicating energy loss between the work done by the oscillating source and that absorbed on the sphere. That deficiency would be accounted for by the potential for transmission of energy to other times in that location. This potential might depend on how long the sphere was to remain in that location and whether that potential were taken up in the future, or not. Again the more structured the oscillation of the charge the more should there be a potential for this resonance through time effect.
All the above proposals bring into play the possibility of acausal phenomena, and indeed, if some of the effects anticipated by the experiments were to result, it would be simple then to set up variations on the experimental theme which might then operate as very basic precognitive devices. However, this would probably depend on whether any energy, as discussed in the preceding paragraph, had the potential to be transmitted to the future and then a measurement made in the present of whether that energy were absorbed at some future time or not. Such a discussion would introduce a number of philosophical implications, which are beyond the scope of this paper.
