Science of the Spirit
Now, a new study suggests that free will may arise from a hidden signal buried in the "background noise" of chaotic electrical activity in the brain, and that this activity occurs almost a second before people consciously decide to do something.
Though "purposeful intentions, desires and goals drive our decisions in a linear cause-and-effect kind of way, our finding shows that our decisions are also influenced by neural noise within any given moment," study co-author Jesse Bengson, a neuroscientist at the University of California, Davis, wrote in an email to Live Science.
"This random firing, or noise, may even be the carrier upon which our consciousness rides, in the same way that radio static is used to carry a radio station."
This background noise may allow people to respond creatively to novel situations, and it may even give human behavior the "flavor of free will," Bengson said.
Predetermined or random
Sir Isaac Newton's laws of classical mechanics suggested the universe was deterministic, with an inevitable effect for every cause. By Newtonian logic, a "freely" made decision is completely predetermined by the actions that precede it.
But quantum physics revealed that subatomic particles' behavior is inherently unpredictable. As a result, physical forces like gravity and electromagnetism can't completely dictate the future based on past events, thus leaving a tiny window for free will to operate through the random behavior of subatomic particles.
Still, many philosophers doubted that the random behavior of miniscule particles could translate to free will, because quantum effects don't hold much sway at larger scales.
Experiments performed in the 1970s also raised doubts about human volition. Those studies, conducted by the late neuroscientist Benjamin Libet, revealed that the region of the brain that plans and executes movement,called the motor cortex, fired prior to people's decision to press a button, suggesting this part of the brain "makes up its mind" before peoples' conscious decision making kicks in.
Hidden signal?
To understand more about conscious decision making, Bengson's team used electroencephalography (EEG) to measure the brain waves of 19 undergraduates as they looked at a screen and were cued to make a random decision about whether to look right or left.
When people made their decision, a characteristic signal registered that choice as a wave of electrical activity that spread across specific brain regions.
But in a fascinating twist, other electrical activity emanating from the back of the head predicted people's decisions up to 800 milliseconds before the signature of conscious decision making emerged.
This brain activity wasn't strictly a signal at all - it was "noise," part of the brain's omnipresent and seemingly random electrical firing. In fact, neuroscientists usually consider this background noise meaningless and subtract it when trying to figure out the brain response to a specific task, said Rick Addante, a neuroscientist at the University of Texas at Dallas who was not involved in the research.
In other words, some hidden signal in the background noise of the brain seemed to determine people's conscious decisions before they made them.
"That's what's wild about it; it's not all noise," Addante told Live Science. "The question then becomes, what is it, and what is the information that it contains?"
Open question
The new study doesn't prove or disprove free will, Addante said.
"If there's something else occurring before our conscious awareness that's contributing to our decision, that raises the question about the extent of our free will," Addante said. On the other hand, the findings might open the door to free will by suggesting it rides on, but isn't quite the same as, the random background noise in our brains, he said.
But Ali Mazaheri, a neuroscientist at the University of Amsterdam in the Netherlands, sees the results as a blow to true free will.
The findings suggest that previous biases in the firing of the brain's sensory processing systems add up, leading people to decisions that the conscious brain later follows, said Mazaheri, who was not involved in the study.
Useful illusion?
But if free will is an illusion, why does it feel so real?
Though that's still a mystery, one theory is that life would be too depressing without the illusion of choice, making it hard for humans to survive and reproduce.
"The idea is that you have the illusion of free will as an artifact to be able to get through life," Mazaheri told Live Science.
The new findings were published in April in the Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.
Reader Comments
It's fun to watch scientists who routinely confuse cause and effect, can't see the forest for the trees, keep chasing their own tails, and try to understand things like free will by measuring brain waves.
"That's what's wild about it; it's not all noise"
Uh, ok. So first you arbitrarily call those things you don't understand "noise", and then you think it's "wild" when you discover it may not be noise. How utterly bewildering. Well, keep going.
Most of us, are not really where we wish we were. Maybe sometimes, but not all the time. We are not really free.
Philosophers and scientists, are among most of us, but not really any better and sometimes, even frequently, worse.
Then there are mystics, a strange category, a few who may even be genuine (not actors like us) who say some really strange things and seem to be somwhere else all the time, somewhere good, even when they are here with us. Maybe they are free?
Psychos seem not to belong to what I would wish to call humanity, except as a reference as to how not to do anything, even when not free, even when toiling morosely or half-heartedly on the road from here to there. They are the Devil's own and seem on the increase, their influence growing like potholes that turn out to be black holes with no escape, not even light.
Dropping into one of those holes, joining them, it doesn't get any worse than that.
So there.
ned
Else it could be that our "free will" is driven by instinct alone. That nagging voice in the back of your head might quite literally be there. Call it the Instinct area of the brain or the soul antenna . Either way...scientists are quite entertaining and offer fun results to ponder and allow others to come up with ideas of their own.
The background noise may indeed be a source for creativity, but it would not be a source for free will. If it is truly random then we can't control it; thus no free will. If it is not truly random (as I suspect it isn't), then it is subject to the same laws of determinism as the rest of our brains; thus no free will. And if this "randomness" is controllable, then the only way we could reliably control it would be with determinism; thus no free will. There is no ghost in the machine.
We function perfectly well without perceiving that free will is an illusion. In fact, perceiving the illusion would probably have been too confusing for our ancestors. Thus there would have been no evolutionary advantage for, and perhaps an evolutionary disadvantage against, perceiving the illusion of free will.
Free will is not necessary to explain any thought or action.
Science is always trying to put some 3d + time aspect to everything.
Despite the damned data that doesn't fit their equations, they just invent something else to explain it (dark matter, dark energy).
I remember hearing once about M theory ("successor" to string cheese theory):
So it has way more than 4 or 5 dimensions, cool!
But, Michio Kaku explained that some of these dimensions are infinitesimally small.
What the heck? A dimension with limit? LOL really some creative math going on!
(In real math a dimension is infinite both ways, not this creative math with imposed limits to hide the idea that we have INHABITABLE realities above this!)
is not background noise but harmony woven deep into our true nature.
Free will is how each person chooses to experience one's present moment. Like anything else, it takes practice to use it consciously and effectively.






there is no place for free will in materialistic universe, only "random behaviour of subatomic particles". How sad.