Brain activity and cognition: a connection from thermodynamics and information theory

Abstract

The connection between brain and mind is an important scientific and philosophical question that we are still far from completely understanding. A crucial point to our work is noticing that thermodynamics provides a convenient framework to model brain activity, whereas cognition can be modeled in information-theoretical terms. In fact, several models have been proposed so far from both approaches. A second critical remark is the existence of deep theoretical connections between thermodynamics and information theory. In fact, some well-known authors claim that the laws of thermodynamics are nothing but principles in information theory. Unlike in physics or chemistry, a formalization of the relationship between information and energy is currently lacking in neuroscience. In this paper we propose a framework to connect physical brain and cognitive models by means of the theoretical connections between information theory and thermodynamics. Ultimately, this article aims at providing further insight on the formal relationship between cognition and neural activity.

Neurobiology as Information Physics

“…As a result, the total thermodynamic entropy of a system is proportional to the total number of distinguishable states contained in the system (Bekenstein, 2001, 2007). Because thermodynamic entropy is potential information relative to an observer (Lloyd, 2006), and an observer in a physical system is a component of the system itself, the total thermodynamic entropy of a system includes the portion of entropy that is accessible to the observer as relative thermodynamic information (Wheeler, 1989; Collell and Fauquet, 2015):…”

“…Various forms of these relationships, including information-entropy bounds, have been applied in neuroscience (Friston, 2010; Sengupta et al, 2013a,c, 2016; Collell and Fauquet, 2015; Sterling and Laughlin, 2015). The contribution of this review is simply to show that these relationships can be united into a common theoretical framework.…”

“…; Raichle and Gusnard, 2002; Herculano-Houzel, 2011), its vulnerability to hypoxic-ischemic damage (Lutz et al, 2003; Dreier et al, 2013) and in the reduction of consciousness often conferred by the onset of energy restrictions (Shulman et al, 2009; Stender et al, 2016). All fMRI, PET, and EEG interpretation rests on the foundational assumption that changes in the information content of neurobiological systems can be inferred by observing energy changes (Attwell and Iadecola, 2002; Collell and Fauquet, 2015), and it is well known that the information processing capacities of neurobiological systems are limited by energy supply (Howarth et al, 2012; Fox, 2015). Overall, these relationships are consistent with the form of information-energy equivalence predicted by Landauer’s principle and information-entropy bounds.…”

“…Current formulations of quantum theory are revealing properties of physical information (Wheeler, 1986; Brukner and Zeilinger, 2003; Lloyd, 2006; Vedral, 2010), and information-interpretive attempts to show that gravity is quantized (Smolin, 2001; Lee et al, 2013) could even lead to the unification of quantum mechanics and the theories of relativity. Although similar approaches are increasingly influential in biology (Schneider and Sagan, 2005; England, 2013; Flack, 2014), “a formalization of the relationship between information and energy is currently lacking in neuroscience” (Collell and Fauquet, 2015). The purpose of this article is to explore a few different sides of this relationship and, along the way, to suggest that many hypotheses and theories in neuroscience can be unified by the physics of information.…”

The Hormesis of Thinking: A Deeper Quantum Thermodynamic Perspective?

“…Secondly, the mitochondrion is implicated both in the inflammatory and ageing process [7][8][9]. Thirdly, there is a fundamental relationship between energy and information [10]. The fourth is that information is describable as a thermodynamic entity [11].…”