Quantum holography: Is it relevant to brain function?

Abstract

1Center fir Brcrir~ Re.reorc.11 ~~ttl I~!Ji)r~iiotioii ~~I S~~C'II(.('.F. R(~dfi)rd UII~UCJI.S~~J~, Ro.\- 6977, Rci(firc(. I'A 24142, USA In 1951, reviewing the state of our knowledge of auditory processes for Steven's Handbook of Experimental Psychology, Licklider ended with: If we could find a convenient way of showing not merely the amplitudes of the envelopes but the actual oscillations of the array of resonators, we would have a notation [I] of even greater generality and flexibility, one that would reduce under certain idealizing assumptions to the spectru~ii and under others to the wave form ... the analogy ... [to] the position-momentum and energy-time problems that led Heisenberg in 1927 to state his uncertainty principle ... has led Gabor to suggest that we may find the solution [to the problem of sensory processing] in quantum mechanics. During the 1970's it became apparent that Gabor's notation also applied to the cerebral cortical aspect of visual and somatic sensory processing. The most elegant work was done with regard to the visual system. A recent review by Tai Singe Lee [2] in the IEEE casts these advances in terms of 2D Gabor wavelets and indicates the importance of frames and specifies them for different Sampling schemes. For the monkey, the physiological evidence indicates that the sampling density of the visual cortical receptive fields for orientation and frequency provides a tight frame representation through oversampling. The 2D Gabor function achieves the resolution limit only in its complex form. Pollen and Ronner did find quadriture phase (even-symmetric cosine and odd-symmetric sine) pairs of visual receptive fields. Currently, recordings made with multiple microelectrodes and data analysis with sufficiently powerful