Is consciousness to be found in quantum processes in microtubules?

Palaeontologists are not in a good position to comment on bacterial flagella. Better to consult biochemists.

The Wiki article on flagellar evolution
(here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_flagella) has this to say:

"There is good evidence that the bacterial flagellum has evolved from a Type III secretory and transport system, given the similarity of proteins in both systems.

All currently known nonflagellar Type III transport systems serve the function of exporting (injecting) toxin into eukaryotic cells. Similarly, flagella grow by exporting flagellin through the flagellar machinery. It is hypothesised that the flagellum evolved from the type three secretory system. For example, the bubonic plague bacteriumYersinia pestis has an organelle assembly very similar to a complex flagellum, except that is missing only a few flagellar mechanisms and functions, such as a needle to inject toxins into other cells. The hypothesis that the flagellum evolved from the type three secretory system has been challenged by recent phylogenetic research that strongly suggests the type three secretory system evolved from the flagellum through a series of gene deletions.[6] As such, the type three secretory system supports the hypothesis that the flagellum evolved from a simpler bacterial secretion system."

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

IMO, the existence and known functions of microtubules is sufficient to explain flagella or any other biological system.

The concept that at some fundamental levels there exists an electro/chemical computational mechanism which allows for mainstream explanations of all mathematical values and functions. That computer is a self-assembled organic quantum computer.
Its name; microtubule.

For sentient organisms awareness must begin at a very fundamental level. If that can be proven then the riddle disappears.

If microtubules are capable of a computational function then the concept of an internal "communicating" network allowing for biological consciousness. we have an answer, no? An internal neural internet which is able to ask "why"... ?

and if interested:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

An update on microtubules:


This is getting really interesting.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

OMG (who I don't believe in)

Go to bed and eat only dry toast, no butter and chicken noodle soup

Drink lemon juice

You have early symsum coming down with MRfluitis

This is getting really interesting

Only one virus away from compelling

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

One virus away from a Quorum sensing and the ORCH-OR function does the rest.
When the count threshold is tripped my brain will start to luminesce and I'll fly away..............

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

On a more serious note; Hameroff talks about the importance of a double benzene ring in the formation of hydrophobic pockets (a fundamental requirement for ORCH-OR).

Low and behold Bonnie Bassler produces the double ring and its indispensable importance in her talks about quorum sensing. and I find that a compelling argument in favor of the direction of the research.

The Holo LuxP auto inducer! See; 37:30 on the clip.


I like the logic contained in the concept of chemical "words" with specific chemical (mathematical) values which can be sensed and produce a fixed response in groups of bacteria,"quorum sensing", and is that not the definition of a functioning "hive-mind"?

Now refine the abilities and what do you get, ..."distinguish self from other"...conscious sentience?

 

There is no benzene ring in this talk. These are lactones.

And all it amounts to is altering gene expression in response to chemical sensing of other bacteria. Nothing remotely related to "consciousness" as we know it, Jim.

 

Does it produce a hydrophobic pocket?

Who's Jim?
Star Trek..

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

?

If I may use your words, this seems very much like a rudimentary or proto-model of sensory "awareness of one's environment" and combined with physical ability to feed, plus 14 billion years of evolutionary selective refinement would inevitably lead to "sentient motivated behavior" , IMO.

Can sentience even exist other than as a control mechanism for a compound (hive) mind?

 

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/2/eaat7603.full

 

Fom the link

Is it unreasonable to envision a neural "quorum sensing" (electro/chemical threshold) function in the bolded sentence?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Penrose and Hameroff's theory has actually gathered quite a lot of supportive evidence over the years.

Has anyone looked into Anirban Bandyopadhay's work? His experiments have conclusively proved that there are quantum effects in microtubules as well many other micro-filaments within the cell.

Penrose himself (look up his interview with Joe Rogan) has said that in addition to microtubules other structures like clathrins might also play a role in conscioussness.

Since they proposed their theory, a whole new science of Quantum Biology has sprung up. We know today that quantum effects are involved in photosynthesis, bird navigation etc.

Max Tegmark's paper is a very old one. And since then multiple refutations and adjustments have been published by Hameroff and Penrose. Tegmark himself does not seem to be very convinced from what I have seen.

The main opposition to this theory seems to come from part of the AI community that wants to build consciouss robots using turing computers. They believe religiously that conscioussness will "emerge" out of turing computation. It seems to me to be an emotional argument rather than a well thought out one.

My personal view? - Penrose is at least close, if not fully correct.

 

That is absolutely false. You refuse to study the research and yet make a definitive statement that no role for them exist in the brain.
Hameroff is the expert in brains and he has clearly demonstrated the essential computative role of microtubules especially in the brain, but also throughout the entire body.

Well, you seem to be missing that this has become standard science. Are we perhaps "behind the times"?

 

That's a statement from ignorance.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/is-your-brain-really-a-co_b_7756700

And that is just one function of microtubules. Their computing powers are applicable to many functional aspects of all organisms.

What Are the Main Function of Microtubules in the Cell?

https://sciencing.com/functions-microfilaments-microtubules-19319.html

Looks like computation of several "ordering" functions, including motor function is a particular ability of microtubules (flagella).

Then to consider that every cell in our body needs microtubules, even for purpose of mitosis (cell division) alone.

btw. Cell division is a mathematical function which requires a computational processor .

 

From the link; Abstract

Hameroff explains this in detail as a description of function and failure in Alzheimer's microtubules. (See page 1 first Youtube link)

While it uses generalized language the abstract obviously describes the microtubular networks and their dynamic functions in braincells.

 

See below.

Abstract,

https://www.galileocommission.org/a...-to-prevent-consciousness-hameroff-et-al-2015

 

To quote post 19: "As you ought to understand by now, I regard you as a one-track obsessive who cannot use scientific concepts properly, and I don't buy this Implicate Order stuff. I'm just not going to waste time reading this crap."

 

The quantum effects in microtubules are equal to the quantum effects in an airplane, aka macroscopically unimportant

 

Probably true.

Even if (just hypothetically,) cells have some mechanism to amplify 'quantum effects' onto the macroscale, how does one get from there to 'consciousness'?

It seems to me that there's a bit of quantum-mysticism hand-waving baked into this.

Quantum is mysterious and little-understood, consciousness is mysterious and little-understood, so quantum must equal consciousness.

Labron James is big, Boeing 747's are big, hence Labron must be a Boeing 747.

Nope, not buying it.

 

As expected. No knowledge, no usable input.

You do understand this statement is in conflict with the research. Can you cite a link to scientific reference that states this? If not, I would suggest you read the information I provided, which suggests otherwise. Or call Stuart Hameroff and Roger Penrose. Penrose knows about quantum, if anybody does. You want to call him a crank?

Seems a lot of people make unsupported assumptions which are contrary to the science cited from a multitude of scientific sources. Do you even realize at what level we are talking?

p.s. I have never heard of a nano size airplane......

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

......Have you?

 

If you find new developments in this area of research, please share it, my friend!