Mathematical modeling demonstrates that subjective experience emerges from non-factorable dynamical manifolds in self-referential systems, suggesting the mind-body gap is an observational artifact.
The explanatory gap between physical neural processes and subjective experience remains a primary hurdle in consciousness science. Here, we present the Structural Operational Closure Framework, a topological and information-theoretic account proposing that this gap is an observational artifact rather than an ontological divide. We formalize operational closure on a topologically non-factorable manifold M through three core axioms: dynamical attractor closure within neural networks, temporal scale decoupling (tau_int << tau_ext) characteristic of recurrent cortico-thalamic circuits, and bounded entropic self-representation. Mathematically, we demonstrate that first-person interiority is a necessary structural requirement for self-referential closed dynamics, rendering functionally identical non-conscious systems (philosophical zombies) physically impossible under these dynamics. We map core phenomenological properties directly to geometric features: perceptual unity corresponds to manifold non-factorability, while qualia privacy reflects operational boundary stability under external driving. Furthermore, we show that non-invasive third-person neural measurements inherent to external observer frames (Pi_O) project dynamics onto a lower-dimensional subspace, systematically destroying global phase coherence and generating an artificial observation gap (Delta_gap > 0). Finally, we define the Operational Closure Index Omega(S), providing a quantitative metric that accounts for why feedforward architectures lack subjective experience while establishing testable constraints for consciousness in both biological neural systems and synthetic architectures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pajares Carmona Angel Luis (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: