Consciousness Threshold Demo

Speculative — no calibration exists

Calibration caveat: C ≈ 0.50 is the inflection point (half-saturation) of any sigmoid bounded at [0, 1] — including tanh. The convergence of 8 approaches on 0.499 ± 0.012 is geometric, not empirical: every approach that derives a midpoint from a tanh-based model will land near 0.50 by construction. Additionally, all 8 approaches share the same framework assumptions and are not independent. No calibration procedure exists to map actual EEG, fMRI, or IIT-Φ measurements to the C-axis, so the kill criterion (EEG-visible threshold at C ≈ 0.50) cannot currently be run against any dataset. Relabeled Speculativeuntil a calibration recipe exists.

Eight approaches within the Synchronism framework converge on C ≈ 0.50 as a consciousness threshold. Hover over each to see the methodology. Note the geometric caveat above.

Hover over an approach to see details

The Convergence

The mean threshold across all 8 approaches is C = 0.499. The standard deviation is 0.012. All 8 approaches fall within ±0.03 of 0.50.

Important: all 8 approaches were developed within Synchronism and share the same tanh-based assumptions. Convergence on 0.50 is expected for any half-saturation argument — it does not constitute independent empirical evidence. The convergence is consistent with the threshold being real AND with it being a mathematical artifact. External calibration (e.g., mapping propofol-stage EEG power spectra to a computed C value) is required to distinguish these.

What Would Falsify This

EEG anesthesia study showing consciousness loss at widely varying C values (1.0 to 6.0)
Species with consciousness at demonstrably different C thresholds
C ≈ 0.50 being an artifact of the tanh function's inflection point (mathematical, not physical)

Related Concepts

Consciousness ThresholdC ≈ 0.50: 8-way convergence from independent approaches The Hard Problem DissolvedPhase patterns ARE experience, not correlates of it