Back to the list


The "Quantum Soul" Part1 - Brain, Mind, and Near-Death Experiences
Written by Stuart Hameroff and Deepak Chopra

The idea that conscious awareness can exist after bodily death, generally referred to as the "soul," has been inherent in Eastern and Western religions for thousands of years. In some traditions, memories and awareness may be transferred after death to other lifetimes: reincarnation. In addition to beliefs based on religion, innumerable subjects have reported conscious awareness seemingly separating from the subject's brain and physical body.

This occurs in conjunction with so-called near death experiences (NDEs), most typically in patients who have been resuscitated after cardiac arrest (e.g., van Lommel et al. 2001; Parnia et al. 2007). Such patients describe remarkably consistent phenomenology including visions of a white light, being in a tunnel, feelings of serenity, conversing with deceased loved ones, life review and, in some cases, floating out of the body (out-of-body experiences - OBEs). Frequently, NDE/OBE patients also report a subsequent loss of the fear of death, and tend to be more serene and accepting of life's vicissitudes (Chopra 2006).

Somewhat comparable experiences have been reported in various types of meditative and altered states, as well as traumatic psychological events, or seemingly without cause. A Gallup poll estimated some ten million Americans have reported some form of NDE/OBE (Chopra 2006). The drug ketamine, used as a "dissociative" anesthetic, can produce subjective reports of conscious awareness outside the body (Jansen 2000), as can various other psychoactive drugs. But subjective reports of drug-induced effects are distinctly different from those of NDEsl
OBEs (Greyson 1993).

Unable to explain NDEs/OBEs, modern science on the whole ignores and derides such reports as unscientific folly, illusions due to stimulation of particular brain regions (Blanke et al. 2004), or hallucination due to hypoxia (lack of oxygen; Blackmore 1998). But in response one can point out: (1) subjective reports of illusions of body image are quite limited and completely different from NDE/OBE descriptions, (2) hypoxic patients are agitated, not serene, and do not form memory, and (3) modem science cannot explain normal, in-the-brain consciousness.

This last point is critical. NDEs/OBEs are particular types of subjective conscious awareness, in some way akin to our everyday conscious experience (including dreams). How the brain produces consciousness remains unknown.The prevalent modem scientific approach to consciousness casts the brain as a biological computer, with 100 billion neurons and their axonal firings and synaptic connections acting as information networks of "bit" states and switches. Variability in synaptic strengths mediated by chemical neurotransmitters shapes network activity
and enables learning and intelligent functions (Hebb 1949; Crick and Koch 2001; 2004). This "brain-as-computer" view is able to account for complex nonconscious cognitive functions including perception and control of behavior. Such nonconscious cognitive functions are described as "zombie modes," "auto-pilot," or "easy problems" (Koch and Crick 2001; Hodgson 2007; Chalmers 1996). The "easiness" derives from the apparent cause-and-effect between specific computational functions of brain neurons, and actions and behavior which do not involve conscious will or phenomenal experience.

The "hard problem" (Chalmers 1996) is the question of how cognitive processes are accompanied or driven by phenomenal conscious experience. Despite detailed understanding of neuronal firings, synaptic transmissions, neurotransmitter chemistry, and neuronal computation, there is no accounting for conscious experience, the "self," free will or "qualia" - the essence of experienced perceptions. How can the 5 The "Quantum Soul": A Scientific Hypothesis 81 redness, texture, and fragrance of a rose, the experiential world, derive from data streams and electrochemical activity?

The answer according to most views in modern science is that consciousness emerges from a critical (but unspecified) level of neuronal computational complexity. In nonlinear dynamics, new properties do emerge in hierarchical systems, but such systems abound in nature and technology without consciousness. (e.g., weather patterns, the internet). The notion that computational complexity per se can account for consciousness may be mere wishful thinking.

The brain-as-neuronal-computer view has three problems.

1. Because brain synaptic computation correlating with sensory processing often occurs after we have responded to that sensory input (seemingly consciously), the conventional view in modern science is that consciousness occurs after-thefact, and that conscious control is an illusion, consciousness is merely along for the ride (Dennett 1991; Wegner 2002). Apparently we are, as T.H. Huxley (1893) famously said, "helpless spectators".

2. The best measurable correlate of consciousness (gamma synchrony EEG) does not derive from synaptic computation. Synchronized electroencephalography (EEG) in the gamma range of 30-90 cycles per second (Hertz, "Hz") occurs in various brain regions at different times concomitant with consciousness (Gray and Singer 1989a,b; Engel et al. 1991; Singer 1995; 1999). Gamma synchrony requires networks of neurons interconnected not only by axon-to-dendrite chemical synapses, the basis for recognized neuronal computation, but dendrite-todendrite gap junction electrical synapses (Christie and Westbrook 2006; Dermietzel 1998). One unconventional view is that gap junctions in various neurons open and close, enabling mobile zones of gamma synchrony to move about the brain, mediating consciousness (Hameroff 2006; 2010).

3. As cells, neurons are far more complex than simple switches. Consider the unicellular Paramecium which can swim around, find food and mates, avoid obstacles, learn and have sex, all without a single synaptic connection. Artificial intelligence (AI) efforts to simulate brain function have yet to simulate anything as intelligent and nimble. Paramecium utilizes intelligent organizational functions of cytoskeletal lattice polymers called microtubules (Sherrington 1953). 

These same microtubules form the internal structure of brain neurons, regulate synapses and disintegrate in Alzheimer's disease (e.g. Brunden et al. 2011). Microtubule information processing may underlie neuronal function. Unable to explain consciousness in the brain, conventional science ignores apparent evidence for NDEs/OBEs, rejecting even the possibility of their occurrence. There are, however, unconventional but scientifically valid approaches to consciousness, which may address the three problems described above, and accommodate
NDEs/OBEs as well as possible conscious awareness after bodily death. Such approaches explore strata of nature at an even finer scale than the chemical reactions and electrical signals relied upon by neuroscience, seeking convincing answers at the quantum level instead.

Read Part2 here.

Write Your Comment


Well, I think I am getting closer to some reason (explanations) for the NDEs I have to experienced. Hah, "conscious awareness" plugs straight into my mindfulness meditation with Adyashanti (et al.). I think this approach will fit my NDE (w/ Meher Baba ).

Be patient, don't worry be happy. R E L A X. A bit more time to configure my book of essays.
Please note "conditions" that bring on this NDE phenomenon. eg - overwhelming emotional stres and meditation. My first visit with Cathy them Tezza.
Greg Day - May 20, 2015
Our Universe can never be understood from material perspective. We have to include life into it. All Life has a \"INNER SPACE-TIME\" field or \"PARALLEL SPACE-TIME FIELD\" that Einstein searched for, where gravity is converted into anti-gravity. This is the \"CONSCIOUS FIELD\". Just as \"SPACE-TIME FIELD\" of Einstein forms the backbone linking the material world, life is sustained by its inner \"SPACE-TIME FIELD\" that links the living world and works opposite to the material world. We are now seeing a \"SECOND SPACE-TIME FIELD\" that co-exist with material space-time field that Einstein presented to us. In short the space-time field in which \"OBSERVER\" and \"ENQUIRER\" exists is paired. This \"LIVING SPACE-TIME FIELD\" forms the real and dominant back bone of the Universe we see. When time in material space-time directs to gravitational collapse, the time in \"LIVING-SPACE-TIME\" opposes thus giving sustenance to the system. The \"LIVING SPACE-TIME FIELD\" is the source of creativity and sustenance of the universe. This is the \"CONSCIOUS FIELD\" that was known to ancient. Everything in the universe is vibrant and conscious. The material world vibrates and creates a centripetal force that directs to \"BLACK HOLE\" \"SINGULARITY\" or \"DEATH\". Living world in contrast vibrates and opposes and creates a force that is directed away from the center. Only life that is exception to this is adult humans. Humans live a mind centered life and exist as slaves to material world. Thus they direct their force against life and becomes the cause for time direction to the whole system. He is the only living system on which the \"Creator\" places a resistance. Modern man thinks he is conscious and intelligent in reality he is the least conscious and intelligent life on earth. \n
John Paily - September 23, 2013
Mine changed my life. Yippee!
Connie Fawcett - January 6, 2012
I honour this divine inner spot in you in the same way as I honour it in myself.\nNamasté!\n\nA woman is in many aspects much different from a man.\nYet she carries both genders in the womb and gives birth to them...
heartphone - January 6, 2012
At the end of the day, nothing belongs to me and I surrender to sleep in the conviction that I will awake in the morning. That in itself is already the biggest miracle there is.\nHowever, everyone has been given a protection shield around himself, his/her own personal environment.\n\nWith this protection shield one keeps the inner personality while being One with its surroundings.\n\nAm a fan of Pierre Teilhard the Chardin, who spoke of this very clearly.
heartphone - January 6, 2012
Will love to read it soon.
Rubi Pun - January 6, 2012
Knowing or intuition, is only partly yours, it doesn`t belong to you!\n\nIt is not your intuition but our knowingness, when you \"think\" intuitively\n\nor knowingly, you are thinking Collectively for all of Creation, it is for the all,\n\na part for each part of creation but as a`s like saying this,\n\n\n\n It`s not that God is impersonal but that really he is Communal - He is about the community\n\nnot individuals, if we all lived for Him, for the whole, we would all be taken care of, because\n\nwe are all part of the whole and yet we would all take care of the whole and each other too\n\nand ourselves all at the same time!!!!!!!!!!\n\n\n\n This is what God wants. This is the end of selfishness, greed, lust etc.\n \nI ask you this, then what are we so afraid of? We each individually one at a time\ncan give ourself over to this way of life right now and it still works, I live for the whole, then\nnaturally that also includes me! Right! Right.... I still take care of myself, only I take care of all\nat the same time, that`s what knowing God can do! Living God...trusting Myself.\nI can only say, is this not truest, upon truest love!!!
Gary Moposita - January 6, 2012
I had a traumatic event years ago leading to near death experience which shook me, if you`d like to know about it. It certainly changed my whole outlook on life.
Heulwen Renshaw - January 5, 2012