! what is mind that the brain may order it t-200

8/13/2019 ! What is Mind That the Brain May Order It T-200

1/29

Proceedings of Symposia in Applied MathematicsVolume 62 997

W hat is Mind tha t the Brain May O rd e r Id?Karl If Pribram

Please remember that we are not now concerned with the physics andchemistry, the anatomy and physiology of man. They are my daily business.

Warren S. McCullmh 1965, in Chapter 1: WW s a Number that anMay Know It Qoui a Man th t He May Know a Nuder? @ 7

IntroductionThe Brain and the ComputerThe New NeurologyThe Brain as Harmonic analyzerHolographic and Wolonomic Processes in the Brain

Holonomic Universe. LeibnizThe Place of Quantum Mechanics in NeuroscienceConclusions and asksAhead

9 BntmductionOver the past 25 years there has been a convergence of interest on theproblem of how conscious experience is generated. The convergence originatesin mathematics, physics, brain science, cognitive psychology and philosophy seeKing r Pribram 1995 . Physicists especially have fertilized the endeavor withoriginal contributions that attempt to bridge the gap between explanations of mindand of matter. However, most of their contributions are innocent of the workaccomplished in systems neuroscience and in experimental psychology. And theobverse is also true: very few brain or behavioral scientists are interested in andconversant with the sweeping changes in thought that have characterized twentiethcentury mathematics and physics. Thus on the occasion of the Centenary of theBinh of Norbert Wiener, the time is ripe for an appraisal of the paths ofconvergence and to acquaint a larger audience with the exciting vistas that areopening before us .

@ 997 American Mathematical Society


2/29

302 KARL H RIBRAM2 The Brain and The ComputerNeurons are ordinarily conceived to be the building blacks, the units oforganization, of the brain. For the benefit of those not recently versed in theconceptions of the subject, let me first review this standard neuron basedconception of the composition of the nervous system. However, as will bed e s c s i ~n Section 2 of t is essay, this emphasis on the neuron must besupplemented by additional configur tions which operate to some considerableextent as processing units independent of the mumn.Anatomically, neurons are composed of a c d l y o which are attached aset of branching input fibers called dendr ites (motlets). Extending from onelocation of the cell M y f the neuron (its axon hillock) is a chemically differentsort of nerve fiber, often longer th n the othens, called the axon. At its terminusthe axon splits into smaller branches called nerve-terminals or teledepldrom.There is a minute gap called a symp se between the fa r terminus of an axon andthe dendrites or cell M y f the adjacent axon on which it impinges.Energy inputs to dendrites are exceedingly small and must, therefore,summate in some way to influence (modulate) the nerve impulses that aregenemeed by the chemical pr- opxating at the axon hillock The resultingmodulated series of nerve impulses propg ates down the length of the axon untilit reaches the teledendrons of its far terminus. When the nerve impulses eeach theteledendrons, they produce one or other c h e m i d , d l e d a neurotrcwlsmitter, thatdiffuses ac m s the synapse. This & W o n cre m an elec~f ochem icaI otentialdifference in the dendrites of the post synaptic n e m n This potential differencein the p st synaptic neuron c n be excittator-y, d l e d & polarizing, or inhibitory,called hyperpolaPizing.1 There are rn als of such s p p n the brain. I shallrefer to the activity initiated at synapses that produces depolarization andhyperpolarization in the dendrites as occuning in the bmin's connection web.The majority of neural processing theories since the seminal conuibution ofMcCuIloch and Pins 1943) have taken the axonal discharge of the neuron, thenerve impulse, as the currency of neural computation. The knowledge that theneuron has only two states firing or quiet suggested comparison with the

hyperpolarize The act of making the internal surface of a neuronal membrane morcnegative wit11 respect to the outside, usually by the exit from the cell of positivelycharged ions (potassium).depolarize Act of making tlic internal surface of a neuronal n~embrancmore positivewith respect to the external surface, usually by the cnny into the cell of positivelycllarged itas (scxlium and calcium).


3/29

WHAT IS MIND THAT THE BRAIN MAY ORDER IT? 3 3

electronic computer. In their g ro s s t ru ~ t ~ re she brain and the digital computerwere thus thought to have marked similarities. As Wiener noted in 1948:the ultra-rapid computing machine, depending as it does on consecutiveswitching devices, must represent almost an ideal model of the problemsarising in the nervous system. The all-or-none character of the discharge ofthe neurons is precisely analogous to the single choice made in determining

a digit on the binary scale The synapse is nothing but a mechanism fordetermining whether a certain combination of outputs from other selectedelements will or will not act as an adequate stimulus for the discharge of thenext element, and must have its precise analog in the computing machine.The problem of interpreting the nature and varieties of memory in the animalhas its parallel in the problem of constxucting artificial memories for themachine. Wiener [6lc, p. 141However, from a fine structural standpoint the brain is considerably morecomplex than the digital computer, and by the 1960 s i t was realized by some ofus that the McCulloch-Pitts theory was inadequate.2 The branching structure ofdendrites (the socalled dendritic tree plays a far more important and diverse role

than was initially surmised, as we shall see Furthermore, analogue computationalso plays a significant role in neural computing.3 The ew NwmlogyMy own approach in the mid 1950 s differed from that of McCulloch-Pitts andthe early Wiener, by focusing on the relationship of neurophysiology and mind,and taking computer programming rather than computer hardware as its metaphor.

Wiener too realized the erroneousness of h i. earlier estimation, wimess his words in1964 in a posthumously published paper.

It is now clear that t is all-or-none character is the result of the long duration intime and the long continuance in space of nervous conduction under essentiallyconstan t conditions. It is not to be expected then in a short fiber in which theremaking of the initial impu lsehas not had headway enough to assume its final shapeor in which there are non-homogeneities such as incoming or outcoming br nches sin the teledendron or the dendrites. Therefore the pattern of all-or-none activity,where highly suitable for the conduction of nervous activity in the white matter, isby no means so suitable for the study of the same sort of activity in the gray matter.As a matter of fact believe there is positive evidence that the all-or-none hypothesisapplied to the gray matter leads to false conclusions. Wiener [65b, p 4011


4/29

3 4 KARL H FUBRAMAt some point in programming, there is a direct correspondence between theprogramming language and the operations of the hardware being addressed. Inordinary serial processing, machine language embadies this correspondence in aneasily recognizable way. Higher oeder languages encode in more subtle ways theinformation necessary to make the hardware run n more abstract and thereforegeneral useful languages. When a word processing program allows this essay tobe written in English, here is no longer any similkty between the osen'slanguage and the binary of th computer hardware. This therefore, initiallyappears s an emneously conceived irreconcilable dualism between mentallanguage m d matetial hapdwaxe operations. When, however, all themnsformatiom, the recoding operations hat l a d fmm binary thoughhexadecimal d n g s , asembPers, operating systemm d th like. pe available, theconnection between the binary system and English becomes transparent.ransposed from metaphor to the actual mind-brain comection, the operationsof the connection web seem far removed in their organization, from. theorganization of our thoughts nd of the psychological procases ?hat we describein obsewation sentences such as I see a red apple. But the separation betweenthese organizations is of the same range s that between computer programmedword p m m i n g and binary pmessing.What is differentin the mind-beain connection h m hat which characterizesthe programcomputer relatiomhip is i t s intimate parallel p d g f self-organizing stiucpums at every level. For instance, the optic newe, whichtransmits v h d nformation, h s more than half-a-million parallel fibers. Highlevel psychological p such s hos involved in cogrition are therefore them u l t of cascades of parallel operations, involving two-way fw dbacb, rather than,as in computes, the result of fairly fixed topdown programming operations.These differences between classical computer and neural pmgramming haveled to new developments in paeallel processing pmgramming architectures calledneur l networks. Successful computations in these networks depend on highlyoften fault tolerant nterconnected elements. The more diverse the computation,the more connections are needed.However, classically, neuroscientists have shown that neuronal pathways aresometimes relatively sparse, and a1ways in a specifically configured fashion.Lashley (1942) w s puzzled by this anatomical fact which is ubiquitous but seemsto be incompatible with the fact that psychological processes depend on patternsthat can be transposed from one location in the body or ts environment to


5/29

W H A T IS MIND THAT THE BRAIN MAY ORDER IT? 3 5another.3The problem becomes resolved when the computational framework of theneurosciences is broadened beyond nerve-impulse-transmission, to include themicroprocessing that takes place within the brain s connection web. The myriadof synapses provide the possibility for processing as opposed to the meretran~mission f signals. The term neurotransmitters applied to chemicals actingat synapses is, therefore, somewhat misleading. Terms such as neuroregdatorand neuromohlrator convey more of the meaning of what actually transpires atsynapses. When nerve impulses an ive at synapses, potential differences areenhanced creating hyper- and depolarizations. hese re never solitary butconstitute arrival patterns. The patterns are constituted of the periodicallyfluctuating hyper- and deplarizations which are insufficiently large toimmediately incite nerve impulse discharge. The delay entailed in the passivediffusion of these patterns affords opportunity for computation. The synapsesoccur in layers in the brain s connection web, and there are axons bridging thelayers of the cortex. Thus, the microprocessing mentioned in the previousparagraph provides the unconstrained high connectivity needed in computationalprocesses.

A major bmdcthrough toward understanding the minute architecture of theconnection web was achieved by Kuffler 1953). He moved a spot of light infront of a paralyzed eye and recorded the locations of the spot that produced aresponse in the axon of a retinal ganglion cell. The direction of response,inhibitory -) or excitatory +), at each location indicated whether the inputbranches (dendrites) at that location were hyperpolarizing or depolarizing. Thelocations revealed the topology, the extent and configuration of the respondingdendritic arborization of that axon s parent neuron. The resulting diagrams ofhyper- and depolarization thus revealed the receptive fields, which activate the

An example of the transposability of patterns is the reasonable fidelity ofwriting with one s left hand or left big toe in the sand or even one s teethwhen one has never previously engaged the neuromuscular apparatus in thisfashion. Even writing on the vertical surface of a blackboard engages theneuromuscular system in a different fashion from when. writing isaccomplished on a horizontal surface.Receptive Field is defined as the area in sensory space, i.e. physical spaceoutside the body, within which an adequate stimulus causes an excitatoryr spons of the neuron from which recordings are being made. It is oftensurrounded by a sensory region, called the nonclmic l receptive field, that


6/29

306 K RL H RIBR Mdendrites of that axon. The receptive fields of retinal ganglion cells are found tohave a circular inhibitory or excitatory center surrounded by a penumbra ofopposite sign.Utilizing Kuffler's techniques of mapping, Hubel and Wiese l(1959) discoveredthat for cerebral cortex the circular organization of the receptive field becomeelongated displaying definite and various orientations. They showed that orientedlines of light stimuli rather than spot stimuli produced the est response recordedfrom the axons of these cortical neurons. They therefore concluded that thesecortical neurons were line detectors. In keeping with the tenets of geometrywhere lines are made up of points, planes of lines and solids of planes, Wubel andWiesel suggested chat line detectors were composed by convergence of inputskom neurons at earlier s t ag s of visual processing (retinal and thalarnic whichacted as spotdetectors due to the circular center-surround organization of thereceptive fields.) This geometric interpretation of neuronal pr.ocessing led to asearch for convergences of paths from feature detected ' such as thoseresponding to lines, culminating in pontifical or gandfather cells thatembodied the response to object-forms such as faces and hands. Thesearch wasin some instances rewarded in chat single neurons might respond best to aparticular object form such as a hand or face (Gross, 1973). However, responseis never restricted to such object-forms. Such W esponses can also occur inparallel networks made up of neuronal ensembles in which convergence isbut onemode of organization.For those using the geometric approach, spots and lines are seen as elementaryfeatures that become combined in ever more complex forms as higher levels ofthe neural mechanism are engaged. In the late l W s , however, new evidenceaccrued (see DeValois and DeValois, 1988 for review) that called into questionthe view that figures were composed by convergence of features and indicatedthat harmonic analysis was a better representation of' what occurred in the brain.4 The Brain s Harmonic nalyzercentury ago, Helmholtz proposed that sensory receptors are akin to a pianokeyboard; that a spatially isomorphic relation is maintained between receptor andcortex as in the relation between keys and strings of a piano, but that each cortical

can modulate the central response.By a fe lure detector is meant that unit of a network which respondsselectively nduniquely to a particular organization in ts receptive field, suchs an edge. line, circle or color.


7/29


8/29

308 KARL H RIBRAMaudition, except that the visual system responds to spatial frequencies in theFourier transform of the visual s t i m u l ~ s .~

There are four critical re sons for preferring the detection of frequencies tothat of geometric features: (a) Each neuron in the visual cortex responds toseveral features of sensory input, and there is no evidence that the differentfeatures are uniquely represented by any single neuron, as would be required ifit acted as a feature detector. For instance, changes in orientation, spatialfrequency, luminance, direction and velocity of the stimulating input all can alterthe output of the neuron as gauged by i ts axonal discharge. b) The form of h eactivity of the connection web of such neurons, s gauged by their receptive fieldconfiguration, can be accounted for by considering them s spatially m dtemporally constrained frequency resonators. (c) These resonators provide apotentially richer panoply for tlle perception of texture and parallax than dofeature detectors. (d) Perceptual research has clearly shown that lines (andtherefore line detectors) composing contours are inadequate elements with whichto account for the pattern recognition in vision. (See Ribram 1991, Lectures 2and 3 for details.)

Harmonic analysis has also contributed to neuroscience by its explanation ofour conscious experiencing of images and objects. For instance, in every-day lifewe become consciously aware of a three dimensional acoustic image in

Spatial frequency. For the simple harmonic disturbance in threedim ensions:

with spacedependent complex amplitude a, one takes the Fourier transform ofthis amplitude= IR3~ ~ ~ P L ~ ~ + P I ~ J + P s ~ ~ )(.) d x p E (Kt3) .

The vector p ( l R 3 ) is called a spatialfrequency, and (lt t3) , the spa tialspectral dokaln. Since+ t , Z = a ( ~ ) e ~ ~ ~

we see that p is the wave vector and 19he wave nunlber of the harmoniccomponent of J having the infinitesimal amplitude 6 p )dy.


9/29

WH T IS MIND TH T THE BR IN M Y ORDER IT? 3 9stereophonic high fidelity reproduction of music. We h o w the sources of thesound to be the speakers, but we also know that by adjusting the phaserelationships between acoustic waves generated by the speakers, we can move thesound away from the two sources, to in-between the speakers or in front of them.Our ears and acoustic nervous syst ms reconstruct the sound to be perceived ina location we know to be incapable of producing that sound

What determines this construction of a sound image away from its physicalsource? Bekesey's ingenious experiments (1960, 1967) with artificial cochleas8hold the answer. By lining up five vibrators on one's forearm, Bekesey was ableto produce the feeling of a single spot that could be moved up or down bychanging the phase of vibrations between the vibrators. When a second artificialcochlea was placed on th opposite foeearm, the feeling of a spot could be madeto jump from one arm to the other. After a while the spot becomes projectedout into the region between and in front of the arms away from the receptorsurface of the skin much as sound is projected from two stereophonic speakers.However, using two arms is not a necessary condition for perceiving an imageaway from the receptor surface. When phase relations between stimulations totwo fingers are adjusted, a spot can be projected outward from them. One feelsthe paper on which one is writing at the tip of one's pencil, not at the tip of thefingers holding it. Harmonic interactions among vibration are the necessaryconditions for such perceptions. s indicated by the work of FergusCampbell and his associates noted earlier, the projection of visual percepts isaccomplished in like manner. And another example of the power of the harmonicview is provided by the extended series of experiments performed by JamesGibson 1979), which utilized two dimensional displays on cathode ray tubeswhich are perceived s three dimensional figures. Gibson argued from hisfindings that three dimensional perception is direct, i.e., immediate, and that allother forms of knowledge and the world are derived from this immediate reality.ln a paper in which I take issue with Gibson (Pribram 1982) regarding whatmight be called the illusion of theUdirectness of appearances, describe theharmonic brain processes which are involved even when perceptions appear to beimmediate.

ochlea Organ of hearing in the inner e r consisting of a spiral structurecontaining three fluid-filled compartments. Fluid set into oscillation by soundwaves causes movement of stereocilia (hairs) or h ir cells which are theauditory neural transducers. Frequency response of hair cells is place codedon the cochlea, with high frequencies represented at the base of the spiral.


10/29

31 K RL H RIBR M5 Holographic and olonokic i D m e s s n th min

Philosophically more important [than Wiener's power spectrum] is .anothermathematical creation of Wiener, the coherency matrix, and this has acurious history. It was entirely ignored in optics until it was reinvented,almost simultaneous1y and independently, by Dennis G a b r in England in1955, and by Hideya Gamo in Japan in 1956.9 (Gabor 1981, p. 490)In 1948 Dennis G a b r made the concept of coherence the basis of amathematical theory aimed at improving the resolution of an image in electronmicrocopy. Instead of fonning photometric images, which recoed intensities butdestroy phase information, the photographic film ought to w o r d the interferencepa tter n of the light difhc?.ed by the ?issue to e examined. Only in the early1960's did the advent of lasers provide the amng source of coherent light bywhich the prucess could be realized. hese hardware realizations made it evidentthat images of the objects that had initially diffracted the light could readily bereconstructed.Gabor named the record of interference pattern a hologram A holographicp is constiucted of interference patterns w ult ing from the intersection of

coherent wave fmnts. One of its mos t inteeesting characteristics is thatinformation PPom the object becomes distributed over the surface of thephotographic film. The light diffracted from each p i n t of the object gets spreadover the entire surface of the film, and the supe@?ion of the rippling waveforms originating from different pintson the object leavesan ntePsecting patternof interference nodes on the surface of the film. The spread is not haphazard,however: It embodies all phase rela tions The Pipples become distributed fromthe point of diffraction somewhat as ripples of waves formed when a pebbleserikes the smooth surface of a pond of water. ' h o w a handful of pebbles intothe pond, and the tipples produced by each pebble will crisscross with thoseproduced by the other pebbles, setting up pa tt er n of interfering wave fronts. Thesmooth mirror-like surface has become blurred, but the blur h shidden within itan unsuspected orderly pattern. A photograph of the pond at this moment wouldbe a hologram. The photographic hologram is such a frozen record of the nodesof interference among wave fronts.The fact that we are able to remember items of experience even when partsof our brain are damaged indicates that the same memory is stored over wideareas of the brain. Until recently, brain and behavioral scientists could not

Wiener's work on optical coherence (c. 1928) is discussed more fully inProfessor Klauder's paper in these Proceedings.


11/29

WHAT IS MIND THAT THE BRAIN MAY ORDER IT 311conceive of any process that was consonant with the facts of brain anatomy andphysiology and at the same time, spread sensory input sufficiently to account forthe distributed memory store. But with the discovery of holography, it seemedimmediately plausible that the distributed memory store of the brain mightresemble this holographic record. I developed a precisely formulated heorybased on known neuroanatomy and known neurophysiology that could accountfor the brain's distributed memory store in holographic terms (Pribram 1%6;1971 ribram et al. 1975). In the decades since, many laboratories-including myown-have provided the evidence that has sharpened the theory and given it amore precise fit to the known facts (for a review see Ribram 1991, Lecture 2 .The theory states that sensory systems perform a series of operations thatcombine to yield the Fourier W o r m a t i o n of the input signal impinging on theretina (Gabor 1968; Pribram 1991, p. 73 . Not only auditory processing butvisual and somatic (skin, muscle and visceral) sensations are initially processedin the spectral domain. As noted, processing is accomplished in a connectionweb at the synapses among arborizations of neurons. Some neurons, now calledlocal circuit neurons, have no axons and display no nerve impulses. Theirfunction is primarily to influence the polarizations. They are most often foundin the horizontal layers of neural tissue such as the retina and cortex in whichinterference patterns become constructed. Fhis accounts for our rememberingdiscrete items after brain damage. Sensory input must, in some form probablyas changes in the conformation of biomolecules at membrane surfaces, becomeencoded into distributed memory traces (see Ribram 1971, Chapter 2; Pribram1996/InPress; and Jibu Pribram and Yasue 1996 In Press . The biomoleculeswould serve as a neural holoscape in th same way as oxidized silver grainsserve the photographic hologram.Aside from these anatomical and physiological specifications, a solid body ofevidence has accumulated that the auditory, somatosensory-motor, and visualsystems of the brain do, in fact, process input from th senses in the spectraldomain. (See Pribram 1991and DeValois and DeValois 1988 for a review of theevidence.)However, the patterns in the connection web are bounded by the anatomy ofthe neuronal branches. To deal with them, it is convenient to partition the time-frequency plane, and more generally the Sdimensional space-time frequencyhyperspace into Gabor's 1ogorts J see lanagan 1972 and Pribram 1991, pp. 28-

l o For the theory of the logon, a unit of structural infornlation (not to beconfused with the Shannon-Wiener information), the reader is referred to theAppendix of this paper.


12/29

312 KARL H PRIBRAM32 .There is an aspect of harmonic analysis to which first Wiener and then, morethoroughly, Dennis Gabor contributed, viz. the tinte-Jrequency restraint-inherentin any signal an aspect which is germane to brain science. This is the restraintimposed by the inequality:

that links a function f to its Fourier transform In engineering circles, it isspoken of as the time band-wid~h elation.During the 1970's these G a b r elerne~2taryfranctions, for which equation (1)becomes an equality, (or Cabor wavelets as they are now commonly called),were used to simulate the visual processing in the cortex, and it was found thatthe results matched closely the reality. As noted earlier, with the advent offrequency analysis in studies of figural pr~cessin gl'pioneered by Schade (1956),Kabrisky (1966), and Campbell and Robson (1968), the term spatial frequencyknown in optics became comm onplace in the visual sciences. Applying tospectral processing a term coined by Heinrich Hertz (1 884) to describe dynarnicalsystems subject to constraints, I called the process described by Gabor asholonornic to emphasize that spectral processing in the nervous system isconstrained by the boundary conditions imposed by the brain's anatomy.To revert to Maxwell, the harp of three thousand string hangs not only inthe gateway of the ear but is also present in the connection web that resonatesat each stage of the brain's sensory pathways. Such resonances were historicallymodelled in terms of the mathematics that describe holography and then in termsof patch or constrained holography, that is, holonomy.Finally, an important insight gained from the results of experiments involvingbrain information processing is that electrical stimulation of the posteriorassociation cortex enhances processing in the imagelobject (space-time) domain,while such excitation of the Frontal cortex enhances processing in the spectraldomain (cf. Pribram 1991 Lecture 10). Thus he constraints, the boundarieswhich are due to neural inhibition, are relaxed by electrical excitation of thefrontal and related limbic formations of the brain. Processing under suchcircumstances becomes more unconstrained and holographic-like.6. A Molonomic Universe. k i b n i z

t least since the time of Newton and Leibniz, two rather different conceptual

l i.e. the neural processing of geometrical forms.


13/29

WHAT IS MIND THAT THE BRAIN MAY ORD ER IT? 313

schemes have dominated thinking. Both are concerned with the lawful relationbetween observed events. But the Newtonians express these relatiorls in terms ofthe relations among material entities, whereas the Leibnizians explain them interms of the cons tructive effect of oscillations (waves). The followirig statementsplace the Leibnitzian view as seen by Wiener into succinct apposition with thecurrently received view as held by most neuroscientists:1 The received view: Brain, by organizing the input from the physical andsocial environment as obtained through the senses, constructs mentalphenomena which are defined to include memory (Gr. mmrthai ,attention (minding), intention (Gr. menos intent), thought (Sanskrit'manos), as well as perceptions of images and objects and feelings such

as love, fear and pain.2 The Leibnitzian view: A pervasive organizing principle of the universeis a hierarchy of monads. A11 moilads are informed, but with diffe rentdegrees of clarity. Mental processes are able to discern the pattern of tliecosmos by vinue of the brain's intunement (albeit imperfect) with theforms inherent in the universe.12Almost all behavioral- and neuro-scientists would today subscribe to someform of statement one, while statement two reflects th belief of many theoreticalphysicists such s Einstein, Dirac and S c h r d n g e r and others. Mathematiciansand m athematical phys icists have faced the dilemm a more directly: Wow is it thatthe operations of their brains so often lead to discoveries of which theexperimental physicist has no inkling, and which he is only able to verify later?

Thus as Dirac has written:It seems to be one of the fundamental features of nature that fundamentalphysical laws are described in terms of a m athematical theory of g reat beautyand power, needing quite a high standard of mathematics for one tounderstand it. You may wonder: why is nature constructed along these lines?One can only answer that our present knowledge seems to show that natureis so constructed. We simply have to accept it. One could perhaps describethe situation by saying that God is a mathematician of a very high order, andHe used very advanced mathem atics in constructing the universe. Our feeble

Or, as C.S. Pierce 1960) so poetically stated it: Every single truth ofscience is due to the affinity of the human soul to the soul of the universeimperfect as that afftnity no doubt is (4, 5.47


14/29

314 K RL H RIBR Mattempts at m athematics enable us to understand a bit of the universe, and aswe proceed to develop higher and higher mathematics, we can hope tounderstand the universe better. Morris 1987), pp. 21, 22Along with their fundamental atomistic researches in statistical mechanics andgenetics, Norbert Wiener and J.B.S. Waldane made contributions that fit into theLeibnizian tradition and fit the theme developed during the second half of this

century, which has been recounted in this paper.I believe that those whose conceptualization operate primarily in the space-time domain find the emergentist view of mind most compatible, while those whoare sensitive to the spectral domain (i.e. interference among wavelengths) arecomfortable with the more interpeneuating Leibnizian view.It is my contention that the advances in bmin science, outlined in the previoussections, give considerable credence to the Leibnizian view, which is worthexploring farther, if only briefly, in so far a s t bears on this issue.What is most important for us is Leibniz's monadology. Just a s the mechanicsof matter could be built l Newton on the basis of the ideal concept of the poin tmars so Leibniz held that the mechanics (or as he p referred to say, dynamics) ofthe spirit could e built on the ideal concept of a point-mind or m o d . Eachmonad, like a tiny mirpor, produces its own image of the universe. Point massescan vary: the mass can-range over the set of positive real numbers. Likewise formonads. For although Eeibniz offered no unit of perceptual range and clarity, hemaintained that th range and clarity of the perception or vision of a monad canvary from the very shott-ranged and very blurred, to the very long-ranged andsublimely sharp. m a y we know that Gabor wavelets have just thesealternatives and can therefore, serve as point-mind units-See Pribrarn 1993,epilogue.)Unlike the Newtonian point mass, which, apart from its mobility in space, iseternally the same, the mon d is not eternally fixed. By a principle of innerunfolding called appetition, the monad can develop its perceptivity. When thisdevelopment reaches a point of clear selfconsciousness, the monad is said to haveattained apperceptive consciousness. But only a minority of monads are soconscious. As Wiener has described it:

Only a small part of the monads are souls, the greater pan being nakedmonads gifted with perception rather than apperception. Wiener [34c , p. 4801

l A fuller discussion of the thought of Leibniz in relation to Wienefscybernetics is given in Professor Gale's paper in these Proceedings.


15/29

WHAT IS MIND TH TTHE BRAIN MAY OR ER T ? 315

These naked monads mirror the universe, but in a passive way, unable tointegrate the activity of mirroring into a self-conscious consciousness [ 3 k p.4801. As for the mirroring activity itself, Wiener perhaps hit the nail on the headwhen he wrote:

This mirroring is best understood as a parallelism, incomplete it is me,between the inner organization of the monad and the organizationo the worldas a whole. The structure of the microcosm runs parallel to that of themacrocosm. Wiener [34c p. 4801.How does this conception of the world fare when judged by the modem

development of holography, which it should e emphasized is classical in that itfollows from Maxwell electromagnetic theory of light and does not need thequantum theory of light?14 Speaking of the Maxwell theory, Einstein wrote in1905:

One must, however, keep in mind that the optical observations are concernedwith tenlpor l me n values and not with instantaneous values, and it ispossible, in spite of the complete experimental verification of the theory ofdiffraction, reflection, refraction, dispersion, andsoon, that the theory of lightthat operateswith continuous spatial functions may lead to contradictions withobservations if we apply it to the phenomena of the generation andtransformation of light. [Einstein (1905), pp 544-5451 (emphasis added)lsThis thought on optical observation, with an explanation of how thesetemporal mean-values are measured, reappears in what Wiener wrote in 1929:One of the remarkable things about light is that the quantities which are

l In fact PlancKs constant h plays absolutely no role in Gabots workI s Physicists often insist on using the term light for that bandwidth of radiant

energy which becomes light where it interfaces the biological retinal surface.Until n interface, biological or artifactual, occurs, the laws governing radiantenergy are not those governing perceived light By analogy, t ke anexperience at the shore: Out in the ocean one can bob up and down with thewater molecuies by means of which the waves are transmitted. But when thewaves interface with the shore, breakers occur, turbulence characterizes theresultant. The breakers with their whiteheads constitute a differentphenomenon from the ocean beyond them. This insight is pursued by Wienerin the quotations that follow.


16/29

KARL H RIBRAMprimarily introduced in the Maxwell theory are not observed; at any rate, inthe case of moderately high frequencies. The Maxwell equations concern theelectric and the magnetic vector. Our optical observations deal with theblackening of a photographic plate or a measurement by a photometer, or thedetermination of the intensity of light with a photoelectric cell, or with theestimation of this intensity by the naked eye, or other measurements of thesame general so Every bpt&l observation teemin tes in t ismanner. [2 ,p. 5251But these thermodynamic transfornations (often chemical reactions) to whichthe images are subject, can yield the temporal mean values only by destroyingphase relationships. As Wiener noted in 1930 he interposition of a gmund-glass scpeen or photopphic plate . . . will destroy the phase relations of ehecoherency matrix of the emitted light, replacing it by a diagonal matrix with thesame diagonal terms [30a, p. 1941It would seem then that were we to be able to examine the univem withoutrecourse to such photometeic processes, we would witness a hologram, that is ahuge interference pattern embodying all phase relations as in our example of thesurface of a pond. n this led implimfe OF F (to use a term due to D.Bohm), each organism, like a hib niz ia n monad, re-presents the universe, and theuniverse reflects, in some manner, the organism that observes i t The perceptionsof an organism cannot be undermod without an understanding of the nature ofthe physical universe nd the nature of the physical universe cannot e understadwithout an understanding of the perceptual process.From the discussion in ?his and the earlier section, it would appear that theinsights we have gained into the nature of the brain is broadly supportive of theEeibnizian point of view. M e n we bring to b a r the new insights offend byquantum mechanics since the mid-1920's, the Eeibnizian p i t i o n getssignificantly reinforced, but remarkably in a way in which the space-time andspectral perspectives get reconciled and appear to be no more divisive than the

two faces of the same coin. This occurs via PlancWs constant h, which opens upa bridge between space-time Iucatable concepts such as mass and energy andundulatory concepts such as frequency, wavelength, amplitude and phase.7 T c Place of uantum Mechanics in Neuroscience

t is the very essence of the de Broglie-Schdinger wave mechanics to claimfor both matter and radiation the validity of the Planck-Einstein equationsrnc2 = hu, p = It/,\,


17/29


18/29

3 8 K RL H RIBR M

and Schrodinger can explain the phenomena of both life and mind. He admits aslimiting extremes the billiard-ball atomism of Lucretius and Newton on the onehand, and, on the other, the ideal world of Plato, these limits being attained s hemassenergy of the system is allowed to tend to zero or infinity, respectively.The fact that the universe is in-between these extremes is what makes life andmind pcrssible. Recall in this regard , that posterior and frontal lobe stimulationof the brain can bring a b u t tendencies toward these extremes of consciousprocessing (Pribram 1991; Lecture 10).Waldane's paper is described in Chapter 10, Section D, of Masani's book(1990). The following is an adaptation of Pages 123- 124 in it. Living organismsself-regulate, self-repair and se lf -r ep du ce , i.e. act s organic units in seemingdefiance of th laws of physics nd hexmodymmics. To incorporate the livingorganism into science adding holistic p ostda tes of one sort or ano ther had beenproposed by vitalists. Haldane points out that the atoms of physics also exhibitan organic unity. For instance, they quickly repair the loss of an electron bypicking up another a behavior that tlle Rutherford, Bohr theories of the atomin the 1910's could not explain. Physicists healed this breach not by addingholistic postulates to these theories, however, but by discovering the intrinsicholism of wave-mechanics a.923). f i e de Broglie, Schrodinger theory wasable not only to account for the observed atomic behavior, but to reveal theexistence (then unknown) of two isomers of the hydrogen molecule. ] n his paperHaldane claims that this wave-mechanics serves to explain biological andpsychological facts that w ere a mystery from the standpoint of classical physicsand chemistry. As Haldane w ri ts :

In a degenerate system degrees of freedom re lost because certain periodicsystems m il la te together instead of independently. This resonance gives riseto various observable phenomena. It is responsible for certain terms in theenergy of a material system. A s the resonators are removed from one another,the energy falls off very rapidly. Waldane (1934), p. 98.Waldane points to some biological phenomena that exhibit the same sort ofbehavior. (a) During reproduction the gene loses its identity: it is hard to tellparent from daughter. b) Quantum-mechanical resonance is behind the largermolecules, and larger building blocks of organic matter, e.g. the joining of aminoacids that produces the protein molecule and chains thereof. Such resonance iswhat accounts for the self-regulatory and reproductive aspects of life.Haldane draws n interesting analogy between crossing a potenti l b rrier and.purposive action on the pan of brain-possessitlg organisms. Water in a cistemfilled to orie inch below die rim will not climb over the rim in order to spill out.But for a niouse placed in a cistern, who can see a piece of cheese lying outside,


19/29

WH T IS MIND TH T THE BR IN M Y OR ER IT 3 9there is a positive probability that it will get out (or le ak ) by climbing over therim and jumping out. As with the quantum m echanical potential ban ier, theprobability of crossing will depend on the streng th of the barrier, in our case theheight of the cistern.Haldane gives a simple explanation for this analogous behavior of mice andelectrons: . . . the electron can penetrate its potential bamer because theinterference patterns of its wave mechanical system effectively extend beyond it[Haldane (1934), p. 971. Mice and men, and other objects too, have such non-local systems when transformed into 4dimensional spatio-temporal terms, thesesystems extend into the future as well. It is this that enab les cerebrally organizedcreatures to act with reference to future and distant events such as the joys ofmunching cheese or winning a tennis match o r observing a solar eclipse, i.e. toact purposively. Thus Haldane brings mind into his quantum mechanicalframework by interpreting it as a far-reaching wave mechanical system associatedwith the brain.

In truth mind is permeated with internal contradiction at every level. We canreason about eternity but we are born and die. We measure in kiloparsecs andlive in centimeters. We aspire and fail, we think and fall into error, we loveand hate a t once. A truly dialectical idealism would not meet these facts withremorse or denial, but with frank acceptance. Haldane (1934), p. 97As Wiener has suggested [32c], [34c], the insights offered by quantummechanics reinforces the Leibnizian view of the world. From a 193 perspectiveWiener wrote:Some of the Leibnizian monads mirror the world more clearly, some lessclearly. This lack of clearness in mirroring i s responsible for our im pressionthat there is chance and indetermination in the world. Now, in the modemquantum theory, the indetermination which i s an essential feature of the world,as represented in the ordinary four dimensions of time and space, i s resolved,according to Heisenberg, if a sufficient number of additional, unperceiveddimensions are superadded. This is the meaning of the fivedimensionaltheories of Fock and Klein, and is even m ore clearly brought out by 'the studyof the problem of many bodies. Th is problem, which at present possesses nocomplete solution either from the standpoint of quantum theory or from thatof relativity, even in the sim ple c se of tw o bodies, can only be treated on thesupposition that each electron canies with it is own complete space-timeworld. Thus each electron possesses its own world of dimensions, whichmirrors the manyditnensional universe of perfect cause and effect in animperfect, four-di mensional, non-causal image. It is surely not fanciful to see


20/29

320 KARL H RIBRAM

in this a parallel to the Leibnizian monads, which live out their existences ina selfcon tained existence in preestablished harmony with the other monads,yet mirror the entire universe. [32c, p. 2031And Wiener continued:

And further, the more organized a system of elementary m i c l e s is, the lessnaked its electrons and other constituent elements, the bem r it mirrors theuniverse, and the better can we read back from our partial system to theuniverse at large. C34c, p. 480)

But Wienen's quantum mechanical interpretation of hib niz ia n monadology isovershadowed by that offered unwittingly by Haldane in 1934. According to thisinterpretation, which reste securely on wave mechanics, every object is -to-speak a monad, its materiality being supplied by its mass and its potentialspirituality by its de Broglie wave system.On the basis of such reasoning, the brain is seen to be the medium for theW o r m a t i o n s that allow us to partake both of the ideal and the materialthe transformations into and out of the implicate oxder, in Bohm's terminology.8 o~inclusi~asnd asks A h a dThe mind-brain ontology, developed in this paper is monistic in the sense ofdenying a duality between mind and matter (not in the sense of it being only onemonad). According to this view, another class of orders lies behind the level oforganization we ordinarily perceive. 'Fhe ordinary oeder of appearances can bedescribed in space-time cmrdinates. 'Fhe other class of orders is constituted offine-grain distributed organizations which can be described s potential in theAristotelian sense because only after radical tmnsformation s their palpabilityin spatiotemporal terms realized. When the potential is actualized, information(the.form within) becomes unfolded into its ordinary space-time manifsta tion; inthe other direction, the transformation enfolds and distributes the informationmuch as this is done by the holographic process. Because work is involved inW o r m i n g , descriptions in terms of energy re suivable, and s the form oninformation is what is mnsformed, descriptions in terms of entropy (andnegentropy) are also suitable. Thus, on the one hand, there are enfolded potentialorders; on the other, there are unfolded orders manifested in space-time.

Left unaddressed by this explanation are two issues: 1) What is it that remainsinvariant when a transition is made between the various levels of the scientifichierarchy such as between atomic physics and chemistry, chemistry andmembrane biology, membrane biology and cell biology, etc., and 2) What is thenature of the correspondence between the message in a computer program or


21/29

WHAT IS MIND THAT THE BRAIN MAY ORDER IT? 321

musical score and their physical embodiments, i.e. the wiring of the computer andthe arrangement of ink dots and lines on paper? I believe the answer to both thequestions hinges on whether one concentrates on the order (form, organization)or the em bodiments in which these orders become instantiated16 (Pribram, 1986;1993).One has to separate supeficia l manifestations trans-formable into one another,and the deeper invariants such as the structure of DNA in the biological examplesabove which in-forms the trm.sformations (Pribram 1996fInPress . For instance,among the instantiation of Beethoven's Sonata (Opus 111) are an initialcomposition (a mental operation completed while Beethoven was already totallydeaf ) a score (a material embodiment) a performance (more mental than material)a recording on compact disc (more material th n mental) and the sensory andbrain processes (material) that make for appreciative listening (mental). But inthe transitions from one instantiation to the next, a certain relation structure, inthe Russellian sense remains invariant. This invariant relation-structure isunaffected by the centuries of "performances, recordings and Iistenings;" It is theessence of Beethoven's Opus 111. For a detailed and sophisticated developmentof this thesis, see Arturo Rosenblueth's M i d nd Brain, M T Press (1970,Chapter 6 .As Rosenblueth points out, what remains invariant across all instantiations isabstract structure, "in-formation", the form within. Thus, according to thisanalysis, it is Platonic "ideals," interpreted s informational structure, thatmotivate the philosophical dialogue spawned by the information revolution (e.g."information processing" approaches in cognitive science) and distinguishes thisdialogue from the continuing dialogue between dualists such as Popper Eccles(1977), materialists such as Dennett (1991) and mentaIists such as Searles (1992)and perry (1980), a vestige of the now waning industrial revolution Themachine was then treated s dead-matter without a trace of mind in it. But thereis a more penetratingLeibiiizian view of the machine based on the functions ofcomputers. This was well articulated by W iener in the words:For us a machine is a device for converting incoming messages into outgoingmessages. A message, from this point of view, is a sequence of quantities thatrepresent signals in the message. Such quantities may be electrical currentsor potentials, but are not confined to these, and may be distributed

l By inst nti tion of a universal (form or organization) is meant one of itsreifications, i.e. embodiments (see Pribram 197 1991). For instance, A 3A are instantiatians of the A design \vhich is universal.


22/29

322 K RL H RIBRAMcontinuously or discretely in time. A machine transforms a number of suchinput messages into a number of output messages, each out put message atany moment depending on the input messages up to this moment. As theengineer would say in his jargon, a machine is a multiple-input, multiple-output transducer. [U e , p. 32To return to Platonic ideals and their relation to the information constitutinga message, Haldane noted that Platonic ideas are limits of real ideas. Russell'srelation-structures(1948) provide the manner by which these lim its re attained.According to my perspective, in-formation conceived as negentropy and thus thestructuring of massless h n i c adiant energy (see Ribram, 1986 for detailedargument) is neither material nor mental. This approach suggests th t a scientificpragmaticism aldn to that practiced by P y h g o ~ e a n s nd early Ponians17, willdisplace mentalism and dualism as well as materialism as a central concern ofphilosophy. Both the ideal mathematical structures which are essentially mentaland the material structures in which they are instantiated are real to me. I l~us,by temperament, I need to be grounded in the nitty gritty of experimental andobservational results as much as I am moved by the beauty of theoretical

formulations expressed mathematically. In my opinion, therefore, the tensionbetween idealism (the potential), and realism (the appearance) which chamcterizedthe dialogue between Plato and Aristotle, will replace that between mentalism andmaterialism. Ibis change in tension will lead to a new surg e of experimentation,observation and theory co n m ct io n in the spirit of a Pythagorean pragmaticism.Thus an answer to the questions as to how mind becomes organized by brainrests on our understanding o the lessons of quantum mechanics and especiallyof that aspect which encodes the spectral domain, the implicate order. Althoughengineers daily use the spectral domain in radar, crystallography and tomography--wherever image processing is important--cognitive neuroscientists are, as yet,only barely acquainted with the pervasive nature of this order. It is now

necessary to make accessible, both by experiment and by theory, the rules fortuning in on the implicate domain so that this domain can become moregenerally understood and scientifically validated. It is critical to our well-beingthat this domain be accepted as operating by virtue of those specific brainprocesses (see Pribram 1991, Lecture 10; Yasue, Jibu and Pribram 1991,

l The claim of the early Ionians that nature was intelligible was based on their.view that the practical arts were intelligent efforts of men to cooperate withnature for their own good. 8. Famngton, 1961, p. 46.) This view wasshared by C.S. Pierce and Wiener.


23/29

WHAT IS MIND THA T THE BRAIN MAY ORDER IT 3 3Appendices A-G) that allow us to resonate t universal orders as cognized byLeibniz, Haldane and Wiener and that we are apt to call spiritual.Appendix: Gabor s clernentary signab and IogonsGabor's pioneering efforts of 1946 addressed the problem of m aximizingtelecommunication across the then newly-laid Atlantic Cable. The prob lem arisesbecause simple harmonic analysis is inadequate to deal with phenomena in whichfrequency itself fluctuates rapidly, e.g. the siren. Gabor has explained theinadequacy of the Fourier theory as follows:

The reason is that the Fourier-integral method considers phenomena in aninfinite interval, sub specie aeternitatis and this is very far from o ur everydaypoint of view. Fourier's theorem makes of description in time and descriptionby the specuum, two mutually exclusive methods. If the term frequency isused in the strict mathematical sense which applies only to infrnite wave-trains, a changing frequency becomes a contxadiction in t rms as it is astatement involving both time and frequency.The terminology of physics has never completely adapted itself to thisrigorous mathematical definition of frequency. In optics, in radioengineering and in acoustics the word has retained much of its everydaymeaning, which is in better agreement with what Carson called our,physicalintuitions. For instance, speech and music have for us a definite timepattem, as well as a frequency pattem. It is possible to leave the time patternunchanged, and double what we generally call frequencies by playing amusical piece on the piano an octave higher, or conversely it can be playedin the same key, but in different time. Evidently other views have theirlimitations, and they are complementary rather than mutually exclusive.[Gabor (1946), p. 4311From excerp ts of Wiener's writings that received from Masani it is clear that

Wiener was aware of this paradox of harm onic analysis , as he called it, in 1925.Indeed, Wiener's writings on musical notation elucidates the words of G abor onmusic that we just quoted:Now, let us see what musical notation really is. The position of a notevertically on the staff gives its pitch or frequency, while the horizontalnotation of music divides this pitch in accordance with the time. The samenotation contains the indication f the rate of the metronome, the subdivision

of sound in to whole notes, half notes, quarter notes, etc., the various rests, andmuch else besides. hus musical notation at first sight s ms to deal with a


24/29

KARL H RIBRAM

system in which vibrations can be characterized in two independent ways,namely, according to frequency, and according to duration in time.iner assumption of the nature of musical notation was that things arenot as simple as all this The number of oscillations per second involved ina note, while it is a statement concerning frequency, is also a statementconcerning something distributedin time. In fact, the frequency of a note andits timing interact in very complicated manner.These considerations are not only theoretically important but correspondto a real limitation of what the musician can do. You can t play a jig on thelowest register of the organ. If you take a note oscillating at a rate of sixteentimes a second, and continue it only for one twentieth of second, what youwill get is mentially a single push of air without any marked or evennoticeable periodic character. It will not sound to the ear like a note butrather like a blow on the eardrum . [56g, p. 1051n 1946 Gabor put this paradox of harmonic analysis to constructive use insignal theory by the simple device of seeking the signal f on the time . axis --,

-), which turned the inequality (1) in Section into an equality. Moreaccurately, consider the more geneeal form of (1)

It can be shown that equality prevails in this when and only when f is of the formf ( i ) = c e - ( - I a / 2 . - b t f o r t r c a l ,

where C and r are real constants, and r2 0. For a suitable normalization theconstaxit C becomes (2rIsr) n u s we get time-signal s f depending on 3parameters, a, b and IGabor called each such function gh given by21 1 / 4 e - ( t - o ) / 2 r . - i b tg a A ~ . r ( ~ ) , f o r t r e a l ,

an elementaryfunction and believed that this 3-parameter system {g 4r: , b real


25/29

WH T IS MIND THAT THE BR IN M Y ORDER IT? 325

r 2 0 s more fundamental for the purpose he had in mind than the familiarone-parameter system{ex : rea l ) whe re e A t ) = e t

of harmonic analysis.Gabor suggested that time-signals be represented by lines in a time-fiequenc):(t,v) plane. The signal ezs , where the frequency vo is constant, isrepresented by the line v = r ,, parallel to the t-axis. The signal 6,, with one-point support at to and so with frequency band --, -), is represented by the linet = to parallel to the v-axis. (Figure 1.) It is clear that in this plane only linesparallel to the t and v-axis are allowed, with the result that all diagrams are madeup of rectangles with side s parallel to these axes.Thus a signal of time-span [a,b] and frequency band [c dmade up of pulses,will be represented by the diagram in Figure 2.It is clear that a rectangle in the plane giving one datum of information ontime and one on frequency could se rve as a unit of information , this st ru ct u~ alinformation, not to be confused with the Shannon-Wiener probabilisticinformation. It is also clear that the best unit rectangle is the one for which

l h v = the constant, obtained from the time-frequency equality. Gaborcalled this the quantum of information because of the similarity of themathematics he used to that used by Heisenberg in defining a subatom ic quantum,and he named it the logon. It corresponds to the bit in the Shannon-Wienertheory.The simplest example of a logondiagram in the time-frequency plane is asheet of music only the round notes have to be turned into rectangles andshaded. The term information plane is most fitting, since the sheet gives theinterpreter exact inform ation s to what to do.As stated in Section 4, to deal with the p at te rn in the connection web, it isnecessary to partition the Sdimensional space-time frequency plan(x, y, z t Ainto Gabor logons .

Fig. 1


26/29

K RL H RIBRAM

Fig. 2

cknowldgcmemtMany thanks are due to Professor Masani ot only for making available hisexcellent publications and p roviding the equations used in this manuscript, but forhis persistent critique and insightful help in putting together this essay. Than ksalso to Shelli Meade, who typed and typed and typed yet again the innumerablerevisions.eferencesAdey, W R 1 98 1) Tissue interactions with nonionizing electronmgnetic fields,Physiological Rev. 6 l 198 I), 435-524Bekesey, G. von 1960) Experiments in Hearing. New York: McGraw-Hill.Bekesey, G. von 1967) Sensory Inhibition. Princeton: Princeton UniversityPress.Cam pbell , F.W., Robson, J G 1968) Application of Fourier Analysis to thevisibility of gratings. J Physiol., 197 pp. 551-566.Dennett, D.C. 1991) Consciousness Explained. Boston: Little, Brown and Co.DeValois, R.L., DeValois, K K 1988) Spatial vision Oxford psychologyseries No. 14). New York, NY: Oxford Universi ty Press .Einstein, A. 1905) Concerning a heuristic point of view about the creation andtransformation of light. In W A. Boorse L. Motz Eds.) The World of theAtom. Basic Books: New York, pp. 544-557.Famngton, B. 1961) Creek Science, Its Meaning for Us Penguin Books,London.Flanagan, J.L. 1972) Speech Analysis, Synthesis and Perception 2nd ed.), Berlin:Springer-Verlag.Frohlich, H. 1968) Long-range coherence and energy storage in biologicalsystems, Int. J Quant. Chern. 2 1968), 641-649.Gabor, D. 1946) Theory of Contnutnication, J.IEEE London, Part BNovem ber issue), 429-457.Gabor, D. 1 968) Improved holograph ic model of ternporal recall. Nature, 217,

pp. 1288-1289.Gabor, D. 1981) Comments on [28d], 129e1, [53a] In Norbert Wierle r .~


27/29

WHAT IS MIND TH A T TH E BRAIN MAY ORDER IT? 327Collected Works Vol. 111, Edited by P.R.Masani. MIT Press: Cam bridge, MA,pp. 490-491Gibson, J. J. (1979) The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston:Houghton Mifflin.Gross, C.G. (1973) Inferotempord cortex and vision. In E. Stellar & J.M.Sprague Eds.), Progress in Ph ~sio logic al sychology ( Vol. 5, pp. 77- 124). NewYork: Academic Press.Haldane, J.B.S. (1934) Quantum mechanics as a basis for philosophy. InPhilosophy of Science Vol. I pp. 78-98.Hubel, D. H. & Wiesel, T. N. (1 959) Receptive fields of sing le neurons in the cat sstriate cortex. Journal of Physiology 148, pp. 574-591.Jiby M., Hagan, S., Hameroff, S.R. ribrarn, K.H., r Yasue, K. 1994) Quantumoptical coherence in cytoskeletal microtubules: Implications for brain function.In BioSystenls 32, pp. 195-209. London: Elsevier Science Ireland , Ltd.Jibu, M. ribram, K.H. & Yasue, K. 1996fIn ress) From conscious experienceto memory stordge and reuieval: The role of quan tum brain dynamics and bosoncondensation of evanescent photons. In The International Journal of ModernPhysics B Memorial Issue: Hiroomi Umezawa.Kabrisky, M (1 966) A Proposed Model for Visual Information Processing in theHuman Brain. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.King, J.S. & Pribram, K.H. (1995) Scale in Conscious kperience: Is the BrainToo Important to be L ej to Speciulisrs to Study? Pdew Jersey: LawrenceErfbaum Associates, Inc.Kuffler, S.W. (1953) Discharge patterns and functional organization ofmammalian retina. J. Neurophysiol 16, pp. 37-69.Lashley, K.S. (1942) The problem of cerebral organ ization in vision. InBiological syntposia Vo l VII Visual mechanisms. Lancaster: Jaques CattellPress, pp. 301-322.Masani, P.R. (1990) Norbert Wiener: 18941964 Vita Mathematics Series 5,Birkhauser, Basel.Maxwell, J.C. (1952) Scientific Papers. Dover Publications, Inc.: New York.McCulloch, W.S. (1965) Etnbodimenfs of m i d . Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.McCulloch, W. & Pitts, W. (1943) logical calculus of the ideas immiment innervous activity. Bull. Math. Biophys. 5 , pp. 115-133.Morris, H.M. (1987) Scientific Creationism. Master Book: El Cajun, CA.Pierce, C.S. (1990) Collected Papers. C. Wartshome, P Weiss nd A BurksEds.). Harvard University Press: Cam bridge , MA.Pollen, D.A., Lee, J.R., & Taylor, J.H. (1971) How does the striate conex beginreconstruction of the visual world? Science 173, pp. 74-77.Popper, K.R.& Eccles, J.C. 1977) The S ev and Its Brain. New York-Berlin:


28/29

328 KARL H RIBRAMSpringer-Verlag.Pribmm, K.H. (1966) Some dimensions of remembering: steps toward aneuropsychological model of memory. In Gaito, J. (eds.) Psychol~athologyofMenlory. New York: Academic, pp. 127-57.Pri bram, K.H. (1 97 1) Languages of the brain: Experinlental paradoxes ~ n dprinciples in neuropsychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Pribram, K.H. (1982) Reflections on the place of brain in the ecology of mind.In W.B. Weimer & D.S. Palermo Eds.), Cognition and the Symbolic ProcessesVol. 11. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 361-381.Pribram, K.H. (1956) The cognitive revolution and mindlbrain issues. AmericanPsychologist 441 507-520.Pribram, K.H. (1991) Brain ar d Perception: Holonomy and Strufure in Figures1Processing. New Jersey: Lawrence ERlbaum Assuciates.Pribram, K.H. (1993) (Ed.) Rethinking neural networks: Quantum fields andbiological data. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. xi-xiv , pp. 531-536(Foreword and afterword).Pribram, K.H., Nuwer, M., & Baron, R. (1974) The holographic hypothesis ofmemory structure in brain function and perception. In R.C. Atkinson, K.H.Krantz, R.C. Luce, & P Suppes (Eds.), Contemporary Developments inMathematical Psychology pp. 4 16467 ). San Francisco, CA: W.W Freeman.Russell, B. (1948) Human Knowledge Its Scope and Limits Simon & Schuster,New YorkSchade, O.H. (1956) Optical and photoelectric analog of the eye. Yownu l of theOptical Society of America 46 pp. 721-739.Schrodinger , E. (1946) What is Life? Cambridge: Cambridge University PressSeatie, J.R. (1992) The Redkcovery of Mind. Cambridge: MIT PressSperry, R W 1980) Mindlbrain interaction Mentalism, yes Dualism, no.Neuroscience 2, 195-206.Yasue, K., Pribram, K.H. r Jibu, M. (1991) Appendices A-G. In K.H. Pribram'sBrain nd Perception: Holononty and Structure in Figural Processing. NewJersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Norbcri Wiener Refcrcnces129el N Wiener, "Harmonic analysis and the quantum. heory", J Franklin Inst.207 1 929), 70-72.130al N. Wiener, "Generalized harmonic analysis", Acta Math. 55 (1930), 1 17-258.13 2~ 1 N. Wiener, "Back to Leibniz (Physics reoccupies an abandonedposition)". Tech. Rev. 34 1932), 101-203, 222, 224.160g1 N Wiener, "Possibilities of the use of the interferometer in investigating


29/29

WHAT IS MIND THAT THE BRAIN MAY OR ER T? 3 9

macromolecular interactions in Fast Fundamental Transfer Processes inAqueous Bioinolecular Systems , ed. F.O. Schmitt, Department ofBiology, MIT, Cambridge, Mass., June 1960, pp. 52-53.[61cl N. Wiener, Cybernetics , Second edition (revisions and two additionalchapters), The MlT Press and Wiley, New York, 1961 paperback edition,The MlT Press, 1965.[64e] N. Wiener, God and Golern, Inc A Comment oncertain points wherecybernetics impinges on religion , MIT Press (1964).[65b] N. Wiener, Perspectives in cybernetics , Progress in Brain Research 71 965), 399408.

! what is mind that the brain may order it t-200

Documents