Re: Quantum spookiness in the brain?

AC <mightymartianca@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 03:00:03 -0700 (PDT),
Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 8, 11:36 pm, Vend <ven...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 8 Apr, 20:59, dkomo <dkomo...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

These authors say nay:

Is the Brain a Quantum Computer?

"We argue that computation via quantum mechanical processes is
irrelevant to explaining how brains produce thought, contrary to the
ongoing speculations of many theorists."

Doesn't seem to be anything new.

It's two fingers to Professor Sir Roger Penrose, who believes that
consciousness and/or soul are quantum mechanical.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Penrose#Physics_and_consciousness

When I hear the word "consciousness" I metaphorically reach for my
earplugs. It isn't going to be good. Usually it's about Why Humans
And Animals Are Utterly Different. Sometimes it's And Don't Talk To
Me About Robots. Sometimes it's Why Your Soul Is Immortal.

When I hear the word "quantum" attached to anything but to physics, I reach
for my earplugs. It's rapidly becoming the most abused word in the English
language.

The one advantage to it is that it is giving "entropy" a rest.


The parallel to Professor Penrose that just popped into my mind -
maybe someone else's suggestion that I "consciously" don't remember
receiving - is Alfred Russel Wallace. Brilliant scientist, tries to
reconcile his own scientific work with spirituality, goes mad but most
people are too polite to say so.

I'm afraid that's my view of it, too.

I don't quite think so, though I agree with the general conclusions
above. I believe that Penrose was dealing with what I will call
the "mechanistic view" of the mind. In that view two absolutely
identical brains will think absolutely the same thoughts and make
absolutely the same decisions.

Folks who think this are basically saying that there can be no
free will since thoughts are then totally dependent on the physical
details of the brain that thinks them.

For many, the only way out of this is to posit a supernatural
something that would allow absolutely identical brains to think
different thoughts.

Penrose, I believe, was pointing out that it is impossible to
have absolutely identical brains because of quantum uncertainty.

The rest of his thinking then took off from this point of departure.
And I agree that the rest of his thinking may be just so much
poop, but the problem of identical brains is a real one and I believe
it is solved by quantum uncertanty.

--
--- Paul J. Gans

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Quantum spookiness in the brain?
    ... irrelevant to explaining how brains produce thought, ... identical brains will think absolutely the same thoughts and make ... have absolutely identical brains because of quantum uncertainty. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Quantum spookiness in the brain?
    ... irrelevant to explaining how brains produce thought, ... identical brains will think absolutely the same thoughts and make ... have absolutely identical brains because of quantum uncertainty. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Quantum spookiness in the brain?
    ... irrelevant to explaining how brains produce thought, ... identical brains will think absolutely the same thoughts and make ... have absolutely identical brains because of quantum uncertainty. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Quantum spookiness in the brain?
    ... irrelevant to explaining how brains produce thought, ... for my earplugs. ... identical brains will think absolutely the same thoughts and make ... have absolutely identical brains because of quantum uncertainty. ...
    (talk.origins)