Neuroscience supports the view that frontal lobes are responsible for long term planning and decision making. They are involved also with the self model. This suggests that the highest layers of MB control frontal lobes. There would be a hierarchy of layers of MB having frontal lobes at the bottom.
Model for the coupling of MB with frontal lobes in terms of cognitive entanglement
A natural assumption is that the control of biological body by MB involves entanglement. Since frontal lobes are associated with high level cognition, this entanglement could be cognitive entanglement discussed in (see this). Cognitive entanglement is a hierarchical entanglemen between wave functions in hierarchy of sub-groups in the factorization of Galois group to a product G1G2...Gn of sub-groups reflecting directly the representation of extension as extension of extensions of .... of rationals.
What is special is that entanglement is directed like attention and hierarchical just like for the slaving hierarchy. The entanglement between states in group algebras of G1 and G2...Gn is directed from boss G1 to slave G2..Gn. Cognitive SFRs are cascades proceeding downwards and reducing entanglement. Negentropy Maximization Principle can however prevent the cognitive measurement cascade from proceeding down to Gn (see this) if it does not give rise to negentropy gain.
Long term goals could involve this kind of cognitive entanglement assignable to directed attention and motor actions as BSFRs at this layer of MB would produce what is experienced by the levels of the hierarchy with the standard arrow of time as a behavior with long termgoals. This would produce what could be regarded as analog of precognition (see this and identifiable as sensory perception of signals propagating to non-standard direction of time. Precognitive dreams would be an example of this.
What happens when frontal lobes are damaged?
This vision conforms with what happens when frontal lobes are damaged. Although intellectual abilities are not lost, long term planning is not possible and the patient loses the ability to initiate actions. Damage can also lead to idiot savant phenomenon. Although the person seems to lack conceptual thinking completely, he/she can possess miraculous looking mathematical skills (see this) or artistic gifts (see this). In some poorly understood sense idiot savants can be extremely intelligent.
Is the character of the cognitive entanglement changed or replaced with something totally different in these situations? TGD predicts two kinds of information related to two different representations of genetic code which relate to each other like function represented by its local values to its Fourier transform as a non-local and holistic representation (see this and this). The local representation of the genetic code is in terms of bits and using sequences of genetic codons as units of 6 bits. The second representation is in terms of 3-chords of light defining the allowed chords of a bio-harmony. Music expresses and induces emotions and bio-harmony would characterize a mood. Emotional intelligence would relate to this representation. Could it be that for idiot savants non-verbal emotional intelligence dominates.
The duality of these two representations of genetic code is highly analogous to the duality of momenta and position coordinates in wave mechanics. In quantum TGD this duality has as an analog M8-H duality (see this and this ) stating that space-time surfaces can be regarded as 4-surfaces in H=M4× CP2 or in M8. M8-H duality relates these representations. H corresponds to ordinary differential geometric space-time representation involving also the notion of field. M8 identifiable as 8-D momentum space corresponds to non-local algebraic and number theoretic representation, which is non-local and holistic since the momenta are analogous to frequencies. Scattering amplitudes in particle physics provide an example of this representation.
Both representations can be used and it depends on the situation which representation is more appropriate. Could it be that for ordinary resp. emotional intelligence H resp. M8 representation is more appropriate? Could one exaggerate and say that not only idiot savants but also people in timeless meditative state and experiencing no separations (produced by cognitive SFRs), and maybe also children "live" in M8 whereas the ordinary people with their tight time schedules and busily performing comparisons "live" in H? Momentum eigenstates are delocalized.
Are meditative states labelled by finite simple groups?
What could be the counterpart of meditative state without cognition be at the level of cognitive representations? Could it correspond to a situation in which it is not possible to create separations as decompositions to unentangled system pairs by reducing the entanglement between the factors of the Galois group G?
This is certainly the case if G is simple, that is does not allow this factorization at all. Simple finite groups are the basic building bricks of finite groups: the classification theory for simple groups (see this) states that simple finite groups is cyclic and of prime order, alternating group consisting of even permutations of n objects, group of Lie type or one of the 26 sporadic groups or Tits group. The meditative states of pure consciousness would correspond to finite simple groups!
A question about possible classification of meditative states definitely raises eyebrows. But the power of mathematics is miraculous: if one agrees that thinking means SFRs (thought generates separations and comparisons) and that in meditative states thinking ceases, this is the conclusion.
Rather paradoxically, the "idiot savant state" would be cognitively irreducible in the same sense as the states of Hilbert space with prime dimension do not allow a representation as entangled states. They would represent elementary particles of cognition - fundamental ideas - from which more complexthoughts are composed by performing repeated extensions. The basic advice of meditative practices is to stop thinking: maybe this is indeed the manner to achieve the state of understanding.
See the article Why the outcome of an event would be more predictable if it is known to occur? (with Reza Rastmanesh) or the chapter About the nature of time.
For a summary of earlier postings see Latest progress in TGD.