Scientists are searching for the physical basis of consciousness and comparing the brain to AI

In the article “Consciousness, Memory, and Intelligence: A Mechanistic Perspective,” published in the International Journal of Psychiatry Research, Dr. Gerard Marks and Haim Gilon propose a broader perspective on the mechanisms of memory than is commonly accepted — not only through the lens of neurons and electrical signals, but also taking into account the role of astrocytes and the complex chemical environment surrounding brain cells. The work builds on earlier research by experts into the molecular foundations of memory and addresses broader questions: can the mechanisms that enable the brain to create and reproduce memories help us understand the nature of thought, intelligence, and consciousness?

At the core of the proposed model is the so-called “tripartite memory mechanism.” According to it, memory is formed as a result of the interaction of three components:

• brain cells (primarily astrocytes, which interact closely with neurons);
• the molecular environment of these cells;
• chemical substances — including metal ions, neurotransmitters, and gliotransmitters.

Scientists suggest that the brain does not merely transmit information via electrical impulses between neurons but also records and then reads it chemically. At the same time, astrocytes, of which there are a great many in the brain, play a special role in this process. According to the authors, clusters of astrocytes are involved in the processing of cognitive information, linking neurons with the extracellular environment.

An important aspect of the model is the consideration of the emotional component. Researchers say that biological memories always carry an emotional context. That is why any physical explanation of memory must include chemical messengers (neurotransmitters and other molecules) that are involved in encoding cognitive data along with their emotional coloring.

From here, the authors move on to broader questions about the nature of thought and consciousness: if experience is physically encoded in the form of memory, can the retrieval of this information and the imbuing of it with meaning form what we perceive as thought?

The comparison with artificial intelligence serves as a kind of test of the robustness of these ideas. Both the brain and the computer store and retrieve data, but the physical nature of this storage is different. In a computer, information is encoded in the hardware, while in the living brain, it is encoded in the cells and the chemistry of nervous tissue.

As AI systems become better at handling tasks traditionally considered manifestations of human intelligence, the question becomes particularly acute: is it enough to increase computational power and complexity to achieve something akin to biological consciousness? Marx and Gilon believe that it is not, since electronic systems lack the biological infrastructure and the emotional processes inherent in living organisms.

At the same time, scientists do not deny AI’s ability to perform increasingly complex intellectual operations. They raise a fundamental question of a different order: is the demonstration of intelligent behavior equivalent to the presence of those biological processes that give rise to mental states such as memory, emotions, and conscious experience.

The authors do not claim to have solved the mystery of consciousness — the article explicitly states that conscious life remains a mystery. Instead, they propose a biochemical model linking brain cells and chemical processes to memory. This approach could become a new starting point for understanding how mental processes are triggered.

If we can figure out how the living brain transforms lived experience into memory, this will bring science closer to understanding how memory turns into thought, and what, ultimately, distinguishes biological intelligence from artificial intelligence.