Science

14634 readers

23 users here now

Studies, research findings, and interesting tidbits from the ever-expanding scientific world.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

Space

Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

Gaywallet@beehaw.org

remington@beehaw.org

A conceptual model linking information, time, and consciousness (ICT Model) (beehaw.org)

submitted 2 days ago by DmitriiBaturo@beehaw.org to c/science@beehaw.org

6 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hi everyone,

I’m working on a compact theoretical framework (ICT Model) that tries to link information dynamics, temporal structure, and conscious processes using minimal assumptions.

The central idea is to treat the rate of informational change (dI/dT) as a meaningful physical quantity. In this approach:

consciousness ≈ local dI/dT

matter = stabilized information

energy = interaction between changing and fixed informational states

The goal is to provide a simple shared language connecting information theory, physics, phenomenology, and models of agency.

A full preprint (with equations, phenomenology and testable criteria) is here:

Academia discussion: https://www.academia.edu/s/8924eff666#comment_1478583

Open-access preprint on Zenodo: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17584782

If anyone here is working in theoretical physics, information theory, philosophy of mind, or cognitive science, I’d appreciate any feedback or critique.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Alsjemenou@lemy.nl 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

How do you make a distinction between 'local' and 'stabilized'? They are in essence the same. What does stabilized mean other than a thing localized in space?

[–] DmitriiBaturo@beehaw.org 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Thank you for the question — the distinction is indeed not obvious at first glance, so let me clarify the terminology.

In the ICT model, “stabilized information” (I_fixed) does not mean spatial localization. It refers to temporal stability — a structure that maintains its form under changes of context (i.e., has a low dI/dT).

“Local,” on the other hand, refers to position — something defined within a particular region of physical space or within an abstract state space.

In short:

local = where it is,

stabilized = how well it persists.

These properties can coincide, but they do not have to. For example, an interference pattern may be local but not stable, while a mathematical invariant may be stable without having any spatial localization.

Within the ICT framework, I_fixed is introduced specifically as temporal stability, not spatial confinement.

[–] Alsjemenou@lemy.nl 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Thanks, that's a great clarification. Im sorry that the link isn't working for me atm. So excuse my ignorance. I still fear complications. The uncertainty principle makes defining a particular space to be localized in, rather impossible. That's not necessarily an issue, but might force metaphysical idealism, not fall neatly in a physicalist worldview. It might hamper wide spread adaptation.

[–] DmitriiBaturo@beehaw.org 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Thanks — that's an important concern, and you’re absolutely right to raise it. Let me clarify why ICT doesn’t require any spatial localization and doesn’t imply metaphysical idealism. In the ICT model, “stabilized information” (I_fixed) isn’t a place in space and not a substance. It’s simply a temporally persistent structure, whatever its physical carrier is. Because of that: ICT doesn’t assume that information has a definite position (so the uncertainty principle is not violated); and it doesn’t require a non-physical “realm” to host information. Everything remains within a physicalist picture: I_fixed = any pattern that keeps its form across time,dI/dT = the rate at which such patterns change. So ICT doesn’t rely on spatial localization and doesn’t push toward idealism — it only reforms the temporal vocabulary we use to describe information dynamics. In ICT, I_fixed is not a Platonic “idea”, not an abstract realm of forms, and not an ontological substrate lurking behind the world. It is simply the minimal temporal stability that any informational process must have in order to persist. “Temporal invariant of minimal change”or dI/dT_min — the condition for the existence of reality. In other words, I_fixed emerges from the process itself — from the fact that some patterns must remain sufficiently stable over time to allow any interaction, measurement, or change.Thus ICT does not assume an idealist metaphysics. It does not place “information” outside reality or above it. Instead, it treats stability (I_fixed) and change (dI/dT) as two inseparable aspects of one physical process. This avoids Platonism entirely: ICT doesn’t posit eternal forms — it formalizes the conditions under which processes can exist at all. Thank you for this incredibly important clarification. This risk genuinely needs to be articulated and addressed explicitly. We will make sure to incorporate it in the next stage of the model’s development and formulate it clearly in writing. Your contribution here is truly valuable — thank you for pointing it out so precisely.

P.S. If the DOCX on Zenodo still doesn't open on your side, you can use the PDF version instead, or simply read the full article directly in the browser via the Academia link: https://www.academia.edu/s/8924eff666