A Possible Flux Density Value of 10 -12 W·m -2 for "Spontaneous" Photon Emissions in Fixed Human Brain Tissue: Was Spinoza Correct?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The equivalence between universal values of 10 -20 J and 10 -12 W·m -2 involves the product of the inverse of diffusivity of wave impedance distributed over the hydrogen wavelength divided by the magnetic permeability of free space. These two values reflect the increment of energy associated with action potentials (a major correlate of cognition) and the power densities of photon emissions during imagination as measured experimentally. The human brain, alive or dead (if structurally maintained) has similar mass and occupies space. We tested the hypothesis that these two properties would be sufficient to produce enhanced spontaneous photon emission compared to empty space. The photon flux density from different volumes (masses) of fixed human brain ranging between 20 mg and 1100 g were measured. Compared to the 20 mg masses that did not differ from dark counts (background), the average flux density for 100 to 1000 g volumes was ~2·10 -12 -2 . These results are consistent with the possibility that mass occupying space reflects it fundamental properties that relate to an intrinsic relationship between energy (J) and flux density (kg·s -3 ). Within the human cerebrum the energy density would be about 10 -11 W·m -3 or 10 -14 J·s -1 . This is equivalent to the discharge of ~10 7 cortical neurons which is within the range of experiencing a percept in the living human brain. These results also support the Hameroff and Penrose concept of consciousness as well as Spinoza's implicit argument that cerebral properties indicates it is a subset of all space. There is quantitative evidence by calculation that the mediating variable may be related to the neutral hydrogen line which exhibits ubiquitous presence in the universe.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".