It would seem that the questions studied by the greatest thinkers from antiquity to the present should have long been answered comprehensively. But this is not the case. The study of the mysteries of consciousness is still one of the key areas of science. And in recent decades, the relevance of research in this area has increased due to the work on the creation of artificial intelligence, because the question arose: is it possible, by creating a computer equivalent of the human brain, to reproduce such a complex substance as consciousness?

Consciousness is a tool with which a person learns about the world, penetrates into the secrets of molecules and DNA, and examines his own body in great detail. However, when it comes to the study of consciousness, a paradoxical situation arises: the instrument and the object of cognition are one and the same thing. That is, it turns out that consciousness must know itself. Consciousness is often defined as the brain’s ability to reflect objective reality by creating sensory and logical images. And here lies another problem. After all, despite the fact that consciousness reflects objective reality, it does so subjectively: a mirror in which everyone sees their own picture of the world. The “reflectivity” of consciousness of different people is influenced by thousands of nuances. These are the physiological features of the work of a particular brain, subjective aspects of perception, such as visual acuity, the ability to perceive colors, smells, tastes, etc., determined by genes and health status, upbringing in the family and society, etc. How are consciousness and the brain related? “These are two different substances,” say dualists, who believe that matter (the brain) exists in time and space, and the soul (consciousness) is outside this framework, that is, they have a fundamentally different nature. Therefore, the material brain can be studied, but the ideal consciousness is incomprehensible. Opponents of dualists – monists – claim that the brain and consciousness have a single nature. The question is which one. Some people consider it ideal and, consequently, unknowable. Material and quite accessible to study (consciousness is a product of brain activity), others say. Still others suggest that the brain and consciousness consist of neutral particles that simultaneously contain the properties of both matter and spirit. This approach is close to the postulates of quantum physics, which states that the whole world consists of quanta that are both a particle and a wave (wave-particle dualism). And it was partly a prerequisite for the emergence of quantum theories of consciousness, which we will discuss further.

Despite the fact that the fundamental nature of consciousness remains largely a mystery to this day, modern neurobiological research has helped to find the answer to many questions. It has long been proven that the cerebral cortex, a part of the brain that was formed later than others in the course of evolution, is primarily responsible for conscious activity. The largest clusters of neurons responsible for the “production” of consciousness are found in the frontal lobes, which make up almost a third of the cortex. Research shows that this is where our abilities to perceive emotions, focus, set goals, feel responsible, and think critically are rooted. Accordingly, this is where the legs of depression, manic states, attention disorders, etc. “grow” from. In schizophrenia, a disease accompanied by a disorder of spontaneous behavior, a tendency to self–isolation from society, etc., there is a decrease in activity in the frontal lobes, namely, in an area called the prefrontal cortex. The formation of various aspects of consciousness requires the coordinated work of different parts of the brain, and many processes occur in the “lower” parts of the brain that are not responsible for conscious activity. For example, attention consists of three processes: arousal, orientation, and concentration. Arousal occurs in the cells of the frontal lobes, but their activation requires stimulation of the cells of the medulla oblongata, leading to the release of dopamine and norepinephrine. The area that helps direct (orient) attention to auditory and visual stimuli is located in the midbrain. But in order for this to happen, you need to shift the focus from the previous stimulus – the neurons of the parietal cortex are responsible for this. But conscious concentration of attention is the prerogative of the upper divisions: the frontal and parietal lobes.

For a long time, scientists considered the brain to be a complex but obedient tool to our will. However, today many studies confirm that the role of a compliant servant is only an appearance. The brain is more like a powerful gray cardinal, pulling the strings of neural connections and controlling our lives. The first series of experiments that made the scientific world question the human-flattering belief about the subjugation of the brain was conducted in the 1970s and 80s by American neuroscientist Benjamin Libet. The scientist decided to determine how three time points relate to each other: the time of making a decision to make a conscious movement, the time of occurrence of activity in the cerebral cortex, called the readiness potential, as well as the time when the movement occurred. Participants wore helmets equipped with sensors that record the moment of a flash of activity in the brain, and a clock was placed in front of their eyes, which determined the time with an accuracy of a fraction of a second. Next, the subjects were asked to relax and wait for a spontaneous desire to move their wrist, remember the time of the desire and make the movement itself – this moment was recorded using sensors attached to the wrist. It was expected that events would occur in the following sequence: making a decision to take an action, the emergence of a readiness potential in the brain, and the movement itself. However, conducting the experiment over and over again, Libet got a completely different result: a flash of activity in the brain (the appearance of a potential for readiness for action) for 300-400 thousandths of a second preceded a conscious human decision to make a move. These 300 milliseconds by Benjamin Libet created a sensation not only in scientific but also in religious communities. After all, they meant that the decision that a person regarded as his own and fully conscious was made in advance … by the brain – which calls into question the very existence of such a thing as free will. Later, Libet’s experiment was reproduced in various variations by other scientists. In 2007, during a trial led by German researcher John-Dylan Haines, participants were offered a choice between pressing one of two buttons, and changes in the corresponding brain regions were recorded using a CT scanner. Experience has shown that the interval between conscious decision-making and action was only a second, while the pause between the “flash” in the brain that occurs at the moment of decision-making and the person’s awareness of this decision lasted from 7 to 10 seconds. In addition, by registering changes in various parts of the brain, scientists were able to predict in more than half of the cases which button a person was going to press – even before he decided it himself. Haines believes that the pauses between bursts of activity in the cerebral cortex and making a conscious decision about action indicate the work of complex neural networks of the highest level. It is here, in the thickness of the gray matter, that unconscious processes take place, information is processed and decisions are made, and only then are brought into the realm of the conscious – and the person remains fully confident that he has thought everything out and made a decision. The research of Libet, Haines, and other similar experiments formed the basis of a new scientific field exploring the neurobiological foundations of free will. Scientists are trying to understand whether the brain acts as a “dictator” only in a limited number of cases when it comes to simple tasks, or whether its levers of influence extend to all areas of our lives? In which cases do we make a decision on our own, and in which cases do we receive a ready-made answer on a platter, confidently interpreting it as a free expression of will?

Can such seemingly different fields of science as quantum physics and research on the nature of consciousness be related? In fact, the fact that consciousness influences quantum processes was established back in the 20s of the last century in a famous experiment: a quantum, which is both a particle and a wave, once in the field of view of an observer, is forced to “determine” its shape and behave accordingly. In the late 80s of the twentieth century, the renowned British physicist and mathematician Roger Penrose stated that consciousness can not only influence quantum processes, but also, in all likelihood, has a quantum nature. But where are the structures that make the brain a quantum computer? In 1994, Penrose, together with neuroscientist Stuart Hameroff, put forward a theory: microtubules, organelles present in every cell and involved in the formation of the cytoskeleton, are responsible for quantum processes. Scientists believe that microtubules can be in a state of quantum superposition (that is, simultaneously in two mutually exclusive states) due to tubulin proteins with polarizing properties. Among the key arguments of the opponents of the Penrose-Hameroff quantum theory of consciousness is the extreme fragility of the quantum superposition: an encounter with a single photon instantly destroys the quantum system. So how can it persist for a long time in a living organism, where billions of chemical reactions take place simultaneously? In 2015, the American physicist Matthew Fisher proposed his own version of the work of quantum mechanisms in a living organism. He believes that phosphorus atoms are involved in the formation of a quantum superposition: two atoms of these elements are in an interdependent (or, in the terms of quantum physics, “entangled”) state. At the same time, they can be in a state of quantum superposition for a long time due to the inclusion of quantum systems in larger formations. The so–called Posner molecules, clusters consisting of calcium and phosphorus atoms, act as protectors protecting phosphorus atoms in a superposition from extraneous influences. Fischer suggests that Posner’s molecules are part of nerve cells and can participate in the “generation” of consciousness. Nowadays, science has accumulated a lot of evidence for the presence of quantum systems in living organisms. It is quite possible that thanks to the joint efforts of quantum physicists, biologists, chemists and other specialists, completely new perspectives will soon open up in understanding the eternal question of the nature of consciousness.

Among the controversial, but certainly interesting and promising modern concepts concerning the structure of the brain and consciousness is Karl Pribram’s holographic theory, which offers an unusual view of the mechanisms underlying memory. Imagine a picture consisting of many puzzles. If at least one puzzle is lost, the integrity of the image is violated: the more fragments are lost, the more “defective” the picture will be. This is exactly how researchers imagined memory until recently. It was believed that certain events were “encrypted” in certain parts of the brain in the form of specific connections between neurons. If such a site is damaged and the neural connection is severed, the memory of the event should be lost – an analogue of the loss of a puzzle in a complete picture of memory. However, experiments have shown that memory is much more complicated. In the course of research by American neuropsychologist Carl Lashley, it was found that mice trained to find the shortest paths through a maze retain the memory of their skill even after removing most of the brain: violations were observed only in terms of motor skills, that is, the ability to physically move. Based on the results of these experiments, as well as data from his own research, Lashley’s colleague, psychologist and neurophysiologist Carl Pribram, put forward a holographic concept of the brain. One of the features of a hologram is that the three-dimensional image that appears when a laser beam comes into contact with a holographic pattern does not lose its integrity, even if the film with the image is cut into pieces. That is, each piece of such a puzzle stores information about the whole picture and serves as the basis for its reproduction. According to Pribram’s concept, our memory is like a hologram: it does not “hide” in specific neural connections, but is “thrown” over the brain in the form of a holographic grid. Each section of this network stores information about the entire memory and can reproduce it if certain fragments are lost.

In a global sense, the phenomenon of consciousness still hides many secrets. However, the study of neurobiological mechanisms has already revealed many secrets of conscious activity. At the same time, in the light of the research mentioned above, many people are now concerned about the question of free will and the possibility of getting rid of the “dictates of the brain.” Indeed, this is a very serious problem. After all, the brain builds unconscious algorithms that control our behavior based on information encrypted in neural connections. In fact, the gray matter of the brain is a mosaic of nerve cells and bridges between them. New connections arise when we encounter something new, be it an event, a person, an object, a concept, etc. The more often an event repeats, the stronger the connections, they no longer resemble a bridge, but a multi-lane aqueduct. The emotional background contributes to the durability of connections: once we experience stress or an exciting meeting, we will return to the event in our thoughts over and over again, polishing and strengthening connections. However, even moments that we didn’t pay attention to or forgot about are included in the intricate mosaic: under hypnosis, people recall little things that are safely hidden in the recesses of memory, or events of early childhood. It is in the networks of this intricate web that the brain draws ideas for its solutions. That is, the set of puzzles from which the algorithms are assembled is limited, all the finds that our gray cardinals “throw at us” lie within the same plane. On the one hand, this mode allows us to save a lot of energy, gives us the opportunity to glide through life, as they say, “without bothering”, giving the reins to the gray substance in the skull. On the other hand, such a balance of power makes it impossible to change: all our good impulses run into familiar unconscious algorithms, resulting in habitual actions. Fortunately, there are methods to get out of this web. 1. Something new. In order for the brain to stop behaving like a know-it-all, it constantly needs to be confronted with something new. This new thing may relate to spatial orientation. At a minimum, it means finding new ways to get to work or shop, and at a maximum, traveling to unfamiliar countries. This will force the brain to exit the “autopilot” mode and begin to cooperate with consciousness, building new routes, overcoming communication barriers, etc. Working with new information also helps to create fresh neural connections. For example, to prevent age-related dementia associated with decreased brain activity, it is recommended to study foreign languages. This may be a new activity: for example, to get rid of food addiction, psychologists do not recommend that people who want to lose weight “get hung up” on diets, calorie counting, etc., because all the same neural connections that store information about eating behavior are involved in such activities. Sooner or later, this leads to breakdowns, that is, a return to old habits. An effective approach is considered to be aimed at creating new neural connections in a fundamentally different field. Optimal – physical exercises that provoke the release of endorphins, the effect of which is comparable to the pleasure of delicious food. 2. Mindfulness practices. These are various techniques that encourage you to focus on the current moment. There are different approaches: questions that a person asks himself during the day, focusing on bodily sensations, increased attention to external stimuli, etc. The task of mindfulness practices, in essence, is to avoid automatic unconscious reactions, striving for cooperation between consciousness and the brain. 3. Practices that change brain activity. Despite the fact that our brain is constantly in working order, it has different modes of activity. With the help of an electroencephalograph, it is possible to register waves of various frequencies and amplitudes, the analysis of which helps to see what state the brain is in. For example, low-amplitude beta waves predominate in the brain of most people during their waking hours.: This is the rhythm of daily routine, it becomes more pronounced in unpleasant situations, accompanied by the release of stress hormones. It is almost impossible to establish contact with the brain, which emits beta waves, and even more so to seize the reins of consciousness from it. But once we calm down and close our eyes, our brain begins to switch to generating alpha waves. This is the rhythm of trance, abstract thinking, as if we are emerging from routine and can see our lives more fully, tune in to changes and invite the brain to cooperate. However, the state of maximum liberation from the dictatorship of the mind occurs in the mode of generating high-amplitude theta rhythms. The brain of a child under the age of five permanently exists in this mode, causing the child’s curiosity, high sensitivity to information, tremendous ability to memorize, etc. The adult brain retains the ability to generate theta impulses only during REM sleep, accompanied by dreams. It is at this time that our nervous system gets maximum rest and copes with stress. In addition, theta rhythms are recorded during deep meditation. Therefore, regular breathing and meditation practices are an opportunity to switch the brain from the exhausting and hectic mode of beta rhythms to the mode of generating soothing alpha rhythms and even healing theta rhythms, allowing neurons to return to the maximum resource state characteristic of the child’s brain.