A. Ya. Temkin ©
Tel-Aviv, 1999

CONTENTS (Chapters only)



    The author hopes that this book will contribute at least a small drop to efforts of many scientists to understand the nature of the human thinking. This hope justifies its writing and publication. The approach to this problem represented in this book is very general one, and just because of this it allowed us to consider from the single point of view not only the human thinking, but also problems of molecular genetics, heredity etc..

Dr. Alexander Ya. Temkin ©

Department of Interdisciplinary Studies

Faculty of Engineering

Tel-Aviv University


Tel-Aviv 69978


E-mail: temkin@eng.tau.ac.il

April 15, 1999


The human thinking is the most wonderful wonder of the World and the most mysterious enigma attracting attention of scientists, especially during the last period of time, when the number of them attacking this terribly complicated and difficult problem essentially increased. This is a great goal by itself to understand the nature of the human thinking. But the significance of researches in this field is not limited only with the advance to the achievement this goal. Really, consequences of the successful progress in this field and obtained results are (or are expected to be) significant also for other important fields of science and techniques. For example, two questions arises from the fact that fundamental physical theories are products of the human thinking: 1)Whether its laws and peculiarities influence such theories? 2)Maybe some difficulties and contradictions contained in these theories are consequences of our thinking properties and peculiarities? These questions can be answered

only on the grounds of the knowledge of the human thinking nature. Something on this subject the reader will find in Chs. 4 and 5. Another example is the following question: whether such systems, other than the brain, may exist that process the information by the same mechanism than that of the brain, in other words, systems thinking as the human brain does? The mechanism of the information processing by the human brain must be found to enable us to answer this question. This problem is considered in Chs. 3 and 5, and some possible consequences of the existence thinking non-biological systems are considered in Ch. 6. It would be interesting to consider, in particular, whether astronomic objects such as Galaxies, star-clusters, interior of a star etc. can process the information as the human brain does. Notice that the processing of the information implies not only the processing of the information going in to the considered system, but also the production of new information by the considered system itself.
    The same thing refers also to researches aiming to understand the mechanism of the human thinking by the creation artificial systems(or their mathematical models) thinking like the human brain, which are developed in two main directions: 1) artificial intelligence (AI) and 2)artificial neural networks (NNWs). Though the goal is not yet achieved(there is not yet adequate model of the human thinking), these researches have already led to many very interesting results. They also engendered the whole fields of applications important by themselves, not obligatory connected with the brain activity, as, for example, the use of NNWs in nuclear engineering.
    But what is the cause that the goal of these researches is not yet achieved? Whether the creation of an adequate model (or models)of the human thinking is principally impossible or it is only the question of time and additional efforts,or something is to be changed in essence of such researches? In Chs. 4 and 5 is found what namely is to be changed in essence of researches aiming the human brain modeling by NNWs.
    When we try to approach the problem of the human thinking, two main questions arises: 1) what kind of the information processing is used by our brain? 2) how this information processing is governed? Without answers these two questions a theory of the human thinking cannot be created. The second question contains a constraint: any answer this question must explain how the thinking of a person is self-governed, in other words, how a person is able to govern his own thinking, and how he can be acquainted on his own thinking processes.
    In the light of the written above it would be natural, first of all, to search for an information processing mechanism as general as possible that, just because of it, can be fit for the information processing in many different systems of different nature. Then it can be expected that the mechanism of the information processing by the human brain is a certain version of this general one. The mechanism of the information processing described in Chs. 1 - 3, is very general because it is built in the framework of the abstract set theory and the nature of the considered sets and their elements is not concretized in the general theory. Of course, they must be concretized in each particular case of the theory application as mathematical, physical, chemical, biological a. o. objects. This mechanism is based on the concept of chains of binary relations (CRs), each of which is constructed of elements of a subset of the given ordered set A, and their activation (ACRs). An equivalent theory can be built, if CRs be replaced by chains of structures defined on these subsets of the set A. The content of Ch. 4 is based on the hypothesis that the human brain processes the information by ACRs, and consequences of this hypothesis are studied. Probably, on a certain stage of this study their comparison with the experimental facts concerning the human thinking willallow us to confirm or to disprove this hypothesis.
    It is important that the activation of a CR (Ch. 1, §1.3) is executed by use of a well-ordered set which is a generalization of time ("ordinary" physical time also can be used in some very important particular cases). It allows one to define different
types of time, e. g., different types of biological time (circadian clocks, thinking time etc.), and to formulate the mathematical condition of that that the time has only one direction, which contains equality that allows one to connect this condition with laws of nature, e. g., with laws of physics. We hope that it will permit, in particular, to understand why the physical time is directed to only one direction.
    In Ch. 7 other objects processing the information by ACRs are considered. These objects are polymer molecules. Our attention is focused on DNA (as well as RNA) molecule, but the consideration refers to a wide class of polymer molecules. Using CRs and ACRs we expressed in terms of information and information processing properties of polymer molecule rotational, vibration and electronic movement, and, correspondingly, processes occurring on their levels. In the case of molecular genetics it opens the way to describe uniformly, in terms of the information and its processing, chemical structure of DNA (as well as RNA) molecule (by genetic code), its electronic structure, vibration and rotational states (by CRs) and their changes (by ACRs). In particular, when it is done, it opens the way to find connection between molecular genetics and informprocessing by the brain (thinking), which, in its turn, opens the way to study hereditary transfer of intellectual faculties and, in general, intellectual peculiarities.
    In Chs. 1, 3 and 4 the subsequent expansions of the primary set A (we call it the source set - see Ch. 1) are considered.
The possibility of such expansions naturally leads to the existence of different levels of the information processing. For example, the information processing by the NNW hardware itself (without use of ACRs - basic level, in our terminology) is the only type of the information processing that is considered in all works on NNWs. Much more complicated and developed constructions such as CRs (and corresponding ACRs) are not considered, in general. This is the main cause of that why NNW is seemed not to be even an approximation to the adequate model of the human brain. In Ch. 4 the application of the proposed information processing method to NNW is considered.
    If the brain processes the information by ACRs, it can explain the effect of "volume transition in the brain" discovered by Luigi F. Agnati, Börje Bjelke and Kjell Fux (see, for example,
Am. Scientist 80, 362-373 (1992)). In this article they write: "Just as electrons flow along wires in a circuit, the neurons in the brain relay information along structured pathways, passing messages across specific points of contact called synapses. Information can no more leave the neuronal circuitry than a train can safely leave its tracks. But there is increasing evidence that neurons can communicate without making an intimate contact. The relaying of messages across synapses may be the fastest means of processing information, but it is quite likely that information often leaves the track." A CR is not localized in a certain point of the brain being a combination of many neurons filling up a certain {\em region}. Therefore, the picture that the neurons in the brain relay information along structured
pathways, does not correspond to the information processing by ACRs, but to the one without ACRs' participation, to the basic level information processing, as we call it. Thus, the effect of volume transmission not only is naturally explained in the framework of the ACR based information processing by the brain, but the existence of this effect confirms that at least a part of the information processing by the brain is done by ACRs. Complicated thoughts can be represented only by ACRs of different levels, or, in other words, the human thinking corresponds to the information processing by ACRs, but not to the basic level of the information processing (Ch. 4).
    Conformably to the human thinking, the existence of different levels of the information processing means the synergetic character of the thinking. However, synergetic character of the thinking consists not only in this. It consists also in the fact that on all biological levels from molecules DNA and RNA up to the macroscopic level of the brain the information is processed by the same mechanism, ACRs, which is repeated when we transit from one level to another. Thus, a set of biological levels of organization exists from molecular microscopic level up to the macroscopic one, and on each biological level a set of information processing levels exists. The genetic information contained in DNA molecules may be transferred to the cellular level and may affect neurons and inter-neuron connections. If be found that these two effects really exist (i. e., these two "may" must be removed), the genetic information contained in DNA molecule and written such as it was described above, influences the CRs structure on the level of neurons and inter-neuron connections. Therefore, it influences the information processing by the brain (thinking), at least, its first level. It was clarified that changes of a lower level of the thinking influence all its higher levels. This means, properties "written" in terms of information on DNA molecule may be transferred to the human thinking up to its highest level. This is a (the?) possible microscopic mechanism of the hereditary transfer of the intellectual peculiarities, talents as well as mental diseases. As it is known, the learning affects inter-neuron connections. In view of the written above, the learning performed on the high level of thinking influences the thinking on lower levels and vice versa. This means, principally, it is not impossible that changes produced by the learning on a high level of the thinking will reach the molecular (DNA and RNA) level, i. e., will change the heredity. It can be expected that such a possibility will be rejected flatly by the big majority of biologists, who will consider it as the return to the theory of Lamarck. However, the science demands to check it by scientific methods honestly and without prejudices.
    The content of Ch. 5 is connected profoundly with the one of Ch. 3. In Ch. 3 was established that the information processing by ACRs can be measured by use of the ACRs' intersection. It was found that not in each pair of such measurements they are compatible (which means that one of them does not influence measuring results of the other one). The set of all possible measurements can be divided into a number of subsets such that in any pair of measurements belonging both to the same subset they would be compatible, while those consisting of measurements belonging to different subsets, would be incompatible. In the framework of the hypothesis that our brain processes the information by ACRs this conclusion is valid for the mind self-measuring. Concentrations of the thinking on different subjects corresponds to the execution of different types of self-measurements. On the psychological ("macroscopic level") known that when a person is concentrated on a certain subject of thinking, he obtains maximum of information on this subject and minimum of information on other subjects. On the level of the thinking mechanism it corresponds to the execution of the certain type of mind self-measurements. Then other types of them, even if they are also executed, provide a small amount of the information because their results are essentially influenced (up to be destroyed) by measurements corresponding to the concentration of the thinking. Notice that in Ch. 4 is shown that the concentration of the thinking on a certain subject is inevitable and dictated by the demand not to create too "dense gas" of ACRs.
    Thus, the existence of incompatible pairs of self-measurements of the mind creates the situation like the one in the physics of the micro-world, where, for example, the measurements of an electron co-ordinate and the corresponding linear momentum projection are incompatible. An adequate mathematical formalism describing the behavior of such a system is algebra of non-commuting operators acting upon points of an abstract space representing states of the considered system. In Ch. 5 is argued that, unlike the quantum mechanics of the micro-world, states of mind are represented by points of a metric space, but not of a Hilbert space. In Ch. 5 was found that the thinking is governed on the level of this metric space of states by means of states' probabilities defined there. If namely the logical thinking is considered, the logic is the quantum one, but different from the one corresponding to the quantum mechanics of the micro-world. Thus, the quantum theory of the mind determines that the logic of the human thinking is quantum by nature. Moreover, as it is found in Ch. 5, it is not obligatory objective, but depends on the individual. The quantum theory of the mind allowed us to define personality as a set-theoretical concept that can be studied by rigorous mathematical methods. In particular, it would be interesting to study symmetry properties of the personality which are very important because they influence the thinking and its logic, as it is shown in Ch 5. Possibility of the existence connections between symmetry properties of the physicist professional personality and those in physical theories of the micro-world is considered in Ch. 5.
    The same arguments that had led to the quantum theory of the mind, allowed us to find a possible natural mechanism of ESP phenomena (Ch. 6). As distinct from Ch. 5, where the thinking of one person was considered, in Ch. 6 the thinking of two persons A and B is considered. In this case not only a number of different realities oA, corresponding to different concentrations of his thinking, is considered, but also those of B including the reality created by his
measurements of different quantities characterizing the A's state. The person A may be in such a state that these realities (concerning A's state) are different, and measurements done by A himself and by B would be incompatible. This means, consideration of Ch. 5 can be applied to the system C = A + B, if C be considered as one quantum mind. In Ch. 6 is shown that the quantum character of C mind may lead to ESP phenomena. Why this "may"? Because this is a possible mechanism of ESP phenomena, but there is not yet enough proof that it really works. Consequences of this hypothesis are considered, in particular, with the purpose to find out how it can be corroborated or disproved experimentally. Notice that in the framework of the proposed theory ESP is an aspect of psychology, but not something
esoteric. The author considers it as an important success of this
theory. In this connection it would be useful to remind that about two hundreds and more of years magnetism was considered as something esoteric.

[back to A. Ya. TemkinHome page]