# Nature and Consciousness https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DB7-j6s58Jc *Recorded: 2020* Jeremy Hadfield, a philosophy, neuroscience, and computer science student at Dartmouth and intern at the Qualia Research Institute, presents the symmetry theory of valence—a framework for quantifying happiness and suffering. He proposes that mental states feel good or bad based on the symmetry of brain processes: consonant, symmetrical neural oscillations correlate with positive experiences, while dissonant patterns correlate with suffering. Using connectome-specific harmonic waves—mathematical tools borrowed from acoustics and applied to brain imaging—researchers can measure these patterns and potentially test the theory. Hadfield explores applications including understanding why meditation increases well-being, why exposure to nature improves mood, and how this framework might eventually allow us to communicate what “good” and “bad” mean to artificial intelligence in precise, measurable terms. ## Transcript WEBVTT 00:00:11.860 --> 00:00:34.860 So I’m going to share a presentation link with everyone. You can use that to just go to the presentation yourself, but also be screen sharing here. If you want to see my presentation, then that works too. And I’ll try to keep it to 10 minutes so that we can have 10 minutes to discuss afterwards. Okay, sharing screen now. Can everyone see that? Okay, sweet. 00:00:35.180 --> 00:01:30.580 So, yes, this presentation is on nature and the symmetry theory of valence and the Qualia Research Institute’s work on quantifying consciousness. So I’m Jeremy Hatfield. I’m a junior at Dartmouth. I’m studying philosophy, neuroscience, and computer science, and I’m an intern at the Qualia Research Institute, or the QRI. we’re working on building a new way to understand consciousness in a consistent, meaningful and rigorous way. And ultimately, the question here is what is suffering and what is happiness? So we don’t really these terms, we have some definitions for them, but we’re not certain what they are. And how can we improve the net happiness of the world if we don’t know exactly what these states are And when I mean what we know what they are, I mean how can we quantify them and how can we actually understand them in a way that’s mind independent or not just dependent on my own subjective evaluation of my own suffering and happiness. 00:01:30.880 --> 00:02:18.660 So, what do the scriptures say about this? Well, they say a lot. They use the words happiness and suffering a lot, for sure. But what do these words mean exactly? So, for example, Elma 41. 10 says wickedness never was happiness. So we know that it’s not wickedness. That’s a start. And we know that the three Nephites were changed so that they might not suffer pain or sorrow. So maybe the three Nephites have fulfilled the hedonistic imperative in that way. or they’re transhumans even. We also know things like the fruit of the tree of life is desirable to make one happy, but what exactly is the fruit of the tree of life and how does it make one happy? The obviously symbolic answer is that the fruit tree of life is righteousness. But what exactly is happiness and what exactly is suffering here? 00:02:19.380 --> 00:02:51.880 So happiness might be the activation of pleasure sensors. It might be the result of insight into the human condition. So when you discover something new about the universe, that’s when you feel happy. It might be a byproduct of physical health. It might just be sheer fun. It might be a result of symmetry in the Connecto, which is what I will posit as the solution. But it might also be a spiritual signal or a sign from God. It might be chemical reactions in the brain, dopamine, serotonin, or tryptamines, or it might be all of these things combined and 00:02:50.379 --> 00:03:43.760 Ultimately, the symmetry theory of valence is a solution to this problem, which is the problem of valence. Valence is essentially just happiness or suffering. So a high valence state is a happy state, and a low valence state is a high suffering state. Valence is just like a scale from one to ten or from one to a hundred or something like that of how good is a mental state. And the symmetry theory of valence is a theory that posits that consciousness is a real and measurable thing and that mental states, like harmony, feel good because they are symmetry over time in the brain. We are wired such that what helps us survive and reproduce actually symmetrifies our brain or symmetrifies our consciousness. And so it posits that there is a fundamental psychophysical law of mental states for sentient beings. That more symmetrical brain processes result in higher valence mental states. And this probably sounds very vague to everyone right now, so we’re going to get into this further. 00:03:44.720 --> 00:04:19.180 Essentially, we might ask, like, why is it that symmetrical brain processes actually result in happier or higher valence mental states? But that’s like a question like asking why the Planck constant is what it is. That’s just how our universe works. We don’t know why higher symmetrical mental higher symmetry produces higher valence, but that might just be a law of the universe. But the prediction of the symmetry theory of valence is actually testable, which makes it a much better theory of consciousness than most non-testable theories. And the prediction is that valence is approximated by the consonance, dissonance, and noise signature of a mental state. 00:04:19.840 --> 00:04:53.660 So how do we actually measure symmetry? That’s a hard question, and the answer is through connectome specific harmonic waves. So those are a lot of big words. First of all, what is a connectome? A connectome is a map of the brain. So here are some examples. Oh, shoot. Some examples of connectomes. This one in the corner here. In the top right corner is an example of Google’s connectome of the brain. But essentially, it maps out all the connections in the brain and all the neurons, for example, their interactions and stuff like that. It’s a complicated map of the entire brain. 00:04:54.020 --> 00:06:10.560 So, connectome-specific harmonic waves are a new approach to cognitive science in the last five years that posits that the human brain exhibits a variety of different large-scale harmonic neural oscillations or brain waves that correspond to different mental states. And we already know this. This is like very well accepted in neuroscience, that certain mental states correspond to neural oscillations or brain waves. But then we apply a kind of math called harmonics, which is already used in music and sound, music theory, and sound. We already know that sound waves can be broken down into sets of resonant frequencies or harmonics, and we can predict how sound waves will oscillate through different kinds of geometry. So this is how we know the acoustics of different rooms, for example. But this isn’t limited to just sound waves. Any kind of wave can be broken down in this way, from ocean waves to wind waves. And we argue that it also can be applied to connectomes or brains. Different harmonics have different frequencies. Higher frequency harmonics can oscillate faster. and propagate shorter distances. And so we can actually look at these waves in the brain and measure them. And we can use this to measure the symmetry of brain states 00:06:09.380 --> 00:06:19.700 So here is yes, Selen Atasoy and others from her lab and elsewhere in the world are yeah, basically 00:06:19.620 --> 00:07:00.140 From the video? If not, that’s okay. I’ll actually just mute it. But this is just a video of someone else at the QRI explaining symmetry. And so these are oh shoot. These are examples of metal plates. And if you vibrate metal plates at certain frequencies, you’ll actually form patterns of the dust on those metal plates. So this is an example of how At certain resonant frequencies, certain patterns will be formed. And in the same way, when certain brain waves oscillate through the brain, certain patterns are formed in the brain. And we can actually measure the consonance or dissonance of those mental states and of those waves. 00:07:00.300 --> 00:07:47.180 So, as you can see later on, this is an example of a study that actually measured connectome-specific harmonic waves. And I don’t claim to understand the math behind this or exactly what’s going on here, but you can see that these different brains have Different levels of activation in different areas. And if you actually see this in action, you can see that the waves will move through the brain Like this. So you can see brain waves moving. This is what harmonics actually look like in the brain. And so using connectome-specific harmonic waves, we can actually measure The frequencies and the symmetry of these brain waves. Hopefully, that makes sense. 00:07:48.540 --> 00:08:17.760 But ultimately, this is all just a theory until we test it. And this is a testable theory. So, what’s going on in meditation or prayer from the perspective of connectome-specific harmonic waves? Well, in meditation or prayer, you’re directing your attention to a single high-frequency oscillation instead of jumping around from lots of different sources of attention. And then your default state network syncs its internal clock with the target of attention, and that will increase the resonance of your mental state. 00:08:18.740 --> 00:08:54.200 So, we can actually test this. All we have to do is induce a high dissonance or a high consonance mental state in a subject, and then we have to evaluate the valence of that mental state. So, for example, the subject might tell us like, this is really pleasant, this is really unpleasant. One way we might do this is directly stimulate the thalamus at different harmonic frequencies and then have subjects tell us, well, this one was more pleasant and this one was more unpleasant. And then we can actually determine if certain frequencies, like dissonant frequencies, are correlated with the valence of the mental state. So over time, we can accumulate evidence that actually symmetry is what produces the happiness or suffering of mental states. 00:08:54.040 --> 00:10:25.959 And this is an example of that. These are all examples of consonance-dissonance noise signatures. So this blue area represents the consonance, this red area represents the dissonance, and the gray area represents the noise. Where consonance is sort of the symmetry, dissonance is the lack of symmetry or anti-symmetry, and then noise is essentially just random activity or lack of symmetry whatsoever. So for example, a high like a great state, like yay, you’re wow, will have lots of symmetry, as you can see here. A painful state, like you just stub your toe, will show lots of dissonance. An anxious state, like excess caffeine, will show this kind of constant dissonance noise nature. You can see that it has quite a bit of noise, but also quite a bit of dissonance. In an incredibly ecstasy type state. So for example, those produced by certain drugs like MDMA, those will produce high levels of symmetry. This might also be seen in exposure to nature or like Runners high, like those kinds of experiences that are highly consonant. And then a state that is like high in noise would be something like SSRIs. And our prediction is that SSRIs or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, which are a common treatment for depression, those don’t actually increase the consonance of your mental states. They don’t actually make them better. They just increase the noise, so you can’t really hear the pain anymore. And that might sound like an unscientific solution, but we can actually test this by looking at all these mental states, acquiring the consonants, distances, and noise signature, and seeing if they match our predictions. 00:10:26.340 --> 00:11:30.620 So this is the explain it like M5 version. I won’t read this all, but if everyone looks at the presentation, you can see it. Essentially, what we’re saying is that there’s a pattern to pleasant experiences. There’s a pattern to which shapes represent more pleasant experiences in the brain. And more pleasant experiences will tend to have higher symmetry. And if this is true, it’s incredibly important because if we can actually figure out what suffering is and what joy are in the brain, then that can lead us to better painkillers, better cures for depression and anxiety, and a starting point for turning consciousness research into a real science And maybe most importantly, it could also allow us to tell artificial intelligence what good and bad means for humans and other sentient beings. So instead of trying to like Really vaguely define what happiness is to an artificial intelligence, we can actually give them a quantifiable theory that says what you need to do is improve the symmetry of mental states, and that’s what will produce happiness in humans and other sentient beings. And then we can ensure that these artificial intelligences will actually promote our happiness rather than accidentally killing us all. 00:11:30.820 --> 00:11:54.680 But we need to figure out if it’s true or not. There’s some research already, but there’s not a lot. This graph in the bottom left corner is interesting because it shows that this equation here, which measures the symmetry of a connectome or a brain map, Is correlated with positive mood. The correlation is not super strong, but this presents some evidence. And then there’s other evidence here as well. that I won’t get into. 00:11:55.000 --> 00:12:44.020 But then how does this relate to nature? Well, what why does exposure to nature, or even images of nature, improve our mood? Well, it does. First of all, we have to establish that it does improve our mood. It definitely does. In fact, that experts have started to call deficiency of nature. nature deficit disorder. Children today spend way less time playing outside, and that reduces cognitive functioning, increases our anxiety and stress, and going outside clearly has great benefits for mental health. But why does this happen? We argue that maybe it’s due to the symmetry or the consonances that they induce in our brain processes. And we can actually measure this. So we can like put people in an EEG or an fMRI machine while they’re exposed to images or actual scenes of nature. And then we can see if that actually produces symmetry and if that’s correlated with the valence of their mental states. So, this is a really interesting approach to understanding nature. 00:12:44.340 --> 00:13:13.180 We can also see that lots of images of nature and nature itself has lots of symmetry. So all these images display some symmetry. And if you just stare at these images for long enough, research shows that your mental state is actually improved even by just staring at images of nature. And why does this happen? Well, some research suggests that natural imagery actually has symmetrical properties and that we actually prefer images that have these more natural properties because our visual system evolved to take in natural scenes. 00:13:13.940 --> 00:13:42.620 So ultimately, it might be that all of our mental states are explained or can be understood in terms of the symmetry theory of valence, and we can use it to have a more quantifiable theory of consciousness. And we can actually quantify what happiness and suffering are and use that to have an incredible benefits for the rest of humanity. And with that, my presentation is over, and we can start discussion. So I’ll stop sharing screen and If anyone has questions, just post them in the chat. 00:13:44.540 --> 00:14:00.140 Okay, thanks, Jeremy. I know we have a few questions. Does anyone I can start reading a question unless someone has one that they’re ready to jump in on. Yeah. 00:14:01.100 --> 00:15:08.320 So Lincoln asked, does symmetry produce happiness or is it correlated with happiness? I would say that those are actually the same question in some sense. Well, I mean, not exactly, but Symmetry in the brain is happiness. That is what happiness is. And so, like, what is it’s a way to quantify happiness. And so, it might just be correlated. There might be a third cause. And that’s it’s hard to pin down exactly what might cause happiness. But ultimately, unless you have a definition of happiness It’s hard to say that symmetry is not what happiness is. Ultimately, what we’re arguing is that there’s actually just in the same way that gravity is, if you ask what gravity is. The only answer that you can give someone is by giving them the equations for gravity. In the same way, if you ask someone what happiness is, what you have to give them is essentially Connect them with specific harmonic waves and the way that those produce symmetry in the brain. That’s what happiness is for sentient beings. And so we can actually really quantify consciousness and figure out the fundamentals. 00:15:12.959 --> 00:15:16.160 Experi I’m not sure what you mean by what about experience. 00:15:18.680 --> 00:15:21.000 Isn’t happiness something we experience? 00:15:22.840 --> 00:16:01.720 Yes, but that experience is our, when we say that we are experiencing happiness, essentially. that sentence can be reduced to, or I wouldn’t even say it’s reduced, it can just be translated to my mental state is currently high symmetry or high content. And that might seem reductionist, but I actually think, I mean, it is kind of reductionist, admittedly. But I don’t think that it can, I don’t think that it means that we’re going to You know, kind of just like treat human beings like robots. We do experience happiness, but that experience is our experience of the symmetry of our brain processes. 00:16:06.720 --> 00:16:20.100 So if someone had a doctor hooks someone up to a machine and it shows there is a printout of symmetry in their brain. And they said they’re not happy, that person is lying. 00:16:20.740 --> 00:17:30.360 No. If that was the case, then that would be empirical evidence that our theory is not true. So, this is just a theory. I mean, I don’t like saying just a theory because in science theories are things that are supported with empirical evidence. Right now, it’s a hypothesis. It has quite a bit of empirical evidence that High symmetry states do correlate with higher valence states. But let’s say we put someone under an EEG or fMRI and they started having really they started saying, I’m having an incredible experience right now, but their mental state was actually super high dissonance. That would be really strong evidence that we are wrong. And so we’re very open to being wrong. We’re very open to that empirical evidence showing that we’re wrong. So far, there hasn’t been much counter-evidence to this theory. But we’re trying we’re actively trying to disprove it. So right now we’re working on a study that would put jhana meditators under Jhana meditators, it’s a kind of meditation that produces states of high bliss. And we put them in an EEG scanner, and we see if their state of bliss correlates with the symmetry of their mental state. And if it turns out that it doesn’t, then maybe we’ll have to start from the ground up. It might turn out that we’re wrong. 00:17:32.280 --> 00:18:39.440 As Lincoln asked another question, if So he asked, is your hypothesis compatible with the hypothesis that mind is substrate independent? And I would say that yes, it definitely is compatible with that. And what that means is like, so does that mean that happiness is independent of like the particular kind of neurons that we have? Could it be possible that a brain like that a silicon mind Like, for example, a computer could experience happiness and pain. And I would argue that, yes, that is the case. And if it turns out that we’re right, and that symmetry is what produces happiness in the brain, then we could actually measure the same thing with computers. We could look at the essentially like the brain processes of a computer and see is this computer happy or is it not? And we would be cautious with doing that because it’s hard to say if the same framework would apply to computers, but it’s definitely compatible with mind being substrate independent and with valence being substrate independent. And this could also be applied. I think that this could more easily be applied to animals than to computers because animals have a more similar type of gray than we do. 00:18:40.720 --> 00:18:52.000 We just have a couple more minutes. I know there are a couple questions asking about other references. Rebecca asks 00:18:50.700 --> 00:19:07.440 She’s guessing you’re familiar with Florence Williams’ book, Nature Fix? Yeah, it’s a great book. I haven’t read it, but I have read parts of it. Yeah. And then Michael Ferguson, Nate asked about Michael Ferguson. I don’t know who that is, so probably not. 00:19:08.240 --> 00:19:38.320 You’ll have to get to know him. He’s doing some really great work on Studying the impact of spirituality on the brain. Oh, really? Yeah, he’s at where is he at? I can’t remember what school he’s at, but. I think he’s at Harvard right now. I don’t remember. I was thinking Harvard, but yeah, I can’t remember for sure. He’s doing postdoctoral work. Yeah, I’ll look him up and see. That sounds awesome. I’ll get you connected. 00:19:40.160 --> 00:19:41.760 Brent, did you have a question as well? 00:19:43.980 --> 00:20:34.600 Muted? No, okay, yeah, you can hear. Yeah, so you work with Michael Johnson at the Quality Research Institute? He’s one of the founders, right? Yeah, he’s worked with us at Canonizer, and he’s. Currently, the fifth ranked expert on our mind experts, the world’s best experts, where the peer rank each other. But anyway, kudos to him, the symmetry theory of valence. But the problem I have with that whole idea is basically to me quali are redness, and that’s a qualitative property. Like all your descriptions of all that are all abstract descriptions of behavior. An abstract description of behavior can’t tell you whether you’re talking about redness or greenness unless you like, for example, the word red, you can’t know what it is unless you point to what it is that is red. Intrinsically red. But anyway, to me, go ahead. 00:20:35.559 --> 00:20:37.559 And now, continue. You were going to finish. 00:20:37.820 --> 00:20:45.260 But but yeah, so how in other words, how might you discover if if my redness is like your greenness? 00:20:46.060 --> 00:21:46.900 Yeah, so The symmetry theory of valence is not a behaviorist theory of consciousness. We’re not actually evaluating behavior. We’re more of an we’re focused on brain states. So I would say that we’re closest to physicalism, although It has some differences. So I would say that this problem of qualia, like how do you actually know if someone is experiencing a certain kind of qualia? You know, that problem is almost intractable. From the perspective of first person consciousness, it is possible to I mean, it’s possible to evaluate that. And I think that one, that the symmetry theory of valence could help in the sense that If someone’s consonants, dissonance, noise signature is almost identical to another person’s consonance distanced noise signature, then we can make the prediction that they’re experiencing similar qualia. And then we could ask them, from a first person perspective, are you experiencing redness right now? And if they both answered yes, then that would turn out that the symmetry theory of valence prediction was correct and that it is the quantum distance noise signature that is correlated with the quality of a mental state. 00:21:47.860 --> 00:21:51.020 Makes sense. Cool. Thanks. Yeah.