Is consciousness to be found in quantum processes in microtubules?

Perhaps so, but they are based on a theme and that adds to its value.

I am collecting knowledge of a kind in a large album from which common themes can be gleaned, by more knowledgeable people than me.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

That's just a cheap shot.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Does it need to? I have shown that microtubules do experience "waveguides". You ask for explanations of terms, then when I give an explanation of a term you say it doesn't mention microtubules. Make up your mind already.

But then I guess you have made up your mind.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

And what exactly does that prove? How does that relate to microtubules?

 

A microtubule can't experience a waveguide. That is gibberish.

A waveguide is a thing that conveys waves, like a pipe conveying water. Normally waveguides convey microwaves, but potentially there can be other sorts. A microtubule may conceivably be able to act as a waveguide, though this has yet to be demonstrated, and it it can, it remains to be shown what that contributes to the functioning of neurons.

A pipe conveying water or waves does not constitute processing of information. That would require some form of gate process, triggered by another input, as in a transistor.

 

It is not intended to prove anything. But it does show that possession of an academic qualification does not make the writer automatically a reliable authority, especially when they go off-piste from their own area of expertise.

 

Yes, it was my term and it generally describes the dynamic properties of microtubules. Microtubules are dynamically variable and assume different conformations depending on chemical information such as Tau binding.

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1504081112#
What is your problem here?

 

Yes.

ty!

This was vehemently disputed in the past. I am happy this is now recognized as it supports the notion that data transmission of various kinds must contribute to the emergence of conscious awareness of this process.

I agree, their work provided proof.

How can you say that?
It is like saying; "You don't need flower to bake bread, because flower is used to bake cake".

 

Not quite correct. My claim is that the microtubule network is the substrate from which consciousness emerges.
Difference!

 

I primarily use the same words as you, but when I use my own words you seem to have trouble understanding them.
That's why I rely on the quoted portions of peer-reviewed papers, because they use words that you will understand, no?

I quote them because I understand the general thrust of research and what it is they are trying to prove. I don't necessarily need to know the scientific equations involved.

 

You are directing your efforts in the wrong direction.
Do you understand what I post and the relevance of the posts? Instead of blaming me for being obscure, why not simply ask for clarification? Have I ever refused to answer a question?

 

Yes and microtubules are pipes that transport water via waveguide equations.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0956566313001590#

See above. Microtubules are transistors.

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnmol.2021.727025/full#

 

I agree, but again what does that prove?
Is that not what peer review is all about. I try to select quotes from papers that are peer reviewed or by agreement of all researchers involved. I doubt that entire ensembles of researchers would commit intellectual fraud.

IMO, if I had a single source that espoused the remarkable properties of this common denominator in almost all biology, I would tend to distrust that myself.

The fact that I have posted from a great variety of sources, all descriptions of microtubule properties and functions tend to reinforce the notion that MT possess truly remarkable properties that suggest its candidacy for being directly associated with emergent homeostatic control of the body's biochemistry and by extension the evolution of conscious experience of their continual processing of all kinds of information.

In that respect Penrose's hypothesis that MT processes involve some quantum function that produces what Hameroff has dubbed "Bings" of conscious experience at a deeper level such as an internal field, seems not unreasonable at all.

 

Afterthought;
If "physical values" can emerge from energy fields in spacetime, can "experiential values" emerge from energy fields in braintime?

What Is a Particle?

.......

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

A Particle Is a ‘Quantum Excitation of a Field’2

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

more...... https://www.quantamagazine.org/what-is-a-particle-20201112/

Could this be happening inside a brain? Is that what Penrose proposes?

 

No.

 

Can you give a hint why not? A reference?

 

Yes, I can give a hint: "experiential values" emerging from "energy fields" in "braintime" contains three nonsensical terms. Whatever criticisms can be made of Orch OR - and there are many, as post 5 of this thread shows - Penrose does not write gibberish.

1) What is an experiential value?

2) There is no such thing as an "energy field". That is Star Trek or Deepak Chopra, not science. This has been gone over many times on this forum. You should know it by now.

3) What is braintime?

 

Tegmark calls it "perceptronium"

how about EM field?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_field

hehe, I knew that would get your attention. It is the spacetime inside the brain, as separated from spacetime outside the brain. And I know it is all space time, but there are local pockets of spacetime that have specific properties, no? I used "braintime" to indicate a local pocket of spacetime inside the brain.

This is how Tegmark uses the term.

Consciousness as a State of Matter
Max Tegmark Dept. of Physics & MIT Kavli Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139 (Dated: February 28, 2014)

more .......
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1401.1219v2.pdf

No wonder he was critical of ORCH OR. I have no such prejudices.

 

A state of matter cannot be a value. You are inventing meanings for things as you go. This is all garbage.

 

Hehe, that is one of the many reasons you and your ignorant tripe is ignored.