Is relating Quantum field theory to the brain and how the brain works silly?

In summary, the conversation discusses the possibility of incorporating physics into the study of the brain. The person initiating the conversation is a physics major with an interest in neuroscience and is seeking suggestions on how to combine the two fields. There is a mention of quantum field theory being applied to the brain, but it is debated whether this is a viable area of research. Some suggest exploring nuclear medicine or imaging as avenues for incorporating physics into the study of brain disorders. The conversation also touches on the controversial topic of using quantum mechanics to explain consciousness, with some dismissing it as a fringe theory. It is mentioned that there are potential applications of quantum mechanics in biology, such as in photosynthesis and bird eyes. Overall, there is a general consensus that there is still
  • #1
nukeman
655
0
Hey everyone,

I would like to first point out I am not a biology major in any way...I am a physics major, with a ever increasing interest in neuroscience.

I am trying my best right now to find ways that I can incorporate my physics knowledge to the brain.

Right now I am trying to figure out some basic research in which I can incorporate physics into the brain, but having a hard time. (if anyone has any suggestions I would LOVE to hear them)

I have been interested and been learning a great deal about quantum field theory, and I have read a couple things on hypothesis that the quantum field theory can be applied to the brain. Or is this considered silly and... however you want to put silly research lol ?

Is it worth looking further into the relationship of quantum field theory to the brain, or maybe someone who is well versed in biology can suggest other ways we can incorporate physics to the brain.

Thanks all! :)
 
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #2
Quantum chemistry applied to biochemistry is indeed an active area of research. However in the case of the brain there has been controversy because there are groups that have made strong claims that consciousness is the product of quantum effects without experimental data to support said claims.
 
  • #3
Ryan_m_b said:
Quantum chemistry applied to biochemistry is indeed an active area of research. However in the case of the brain there has been controversy because there are groups that have made strong claims that consciousness is the product of quantum effects without experimental data to support said claims.

Yes, I have heard a few things about that concern.

As you said, there is no experimental data to support such claims on quantum brain dynamics.

However, can this be a possible area to look to research, or is it simply something impossible to research?

EDIT: Since you know what I am trying to say, do you have any suggestions on research I can look into that relates physics to the brain as in disorders in many forms. ?
 
  • #4
nukeman said:
However, can this be a possible area to look to research, or is it simply something impossible to research?
I don't see why not but then again neither quantum physics nor neuroscience are my field
nukeman said:
EDIT: Since you know what I am trying to say, do you have any suggestions on research I can look into that relates physics to the brain as in disorders in many forms. ?
Yes, nuclear medicine and/or imaging would be great avenues to explore for someone with a physics background.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
nukeman said:
I have been interested and been learning a great deal about quantum field theory, and I have read a couple things on hypothesis that the quantum field theory can be applied to the brain. Or is this considered silly and... however you want to put silly research lol ?

That's silly. But the techniques of QFT (path integral) are applicable to the brain.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1009.5966
http://neurotheory.columbia.edu/~larry/ToyoizumiPRE11.pdf
http://www-clmc.usc.edu/publications//T/TheodorouThesisCorrected.pdf
 
  • #6
Hey...

atyy, so you are saying quantum brain dynamics is silly?

Thanks for those links, pretty interesting stuff!
 
  • #7
nukeman said:
atyy, so you are saying quantum brain dynamics is silly?

Yes, unless you want to do quantum chemistry or something like that, but that's more chemistry than biology, if one is allowed to draw such conventional distinctions.

Even in physics, statistical field theory as used in critical phenomena uses the formalism of the quantum field theory, but the physics itself is classical statistical mechanics.
 
  • #8
nukeman said:
Hey everyone,

I would like to first point out I am not a biology major in any way...I am a physics major, with a ever increasing interest in neuroscience.

I am trying my best right now to find ways that I can incorporate my physics knowledge to the brain.

Right now I am trying to figure out some basic research in which I can incorporate physics into the brain, but having a hard time. (if anyone has any suggestions I would LOVE to hear them)

I have been interested and been learning a great deal about quantum field theory, and I have read a couple things on hypothesis that the quantum field theory can be applied to the brain. Or is this considered silly and... however you want to put silly research lol ?

Is it worth looking further into the relationship of quantum field theory to the brain, or maybe someone who is well versed in biology can suggest other ways we can incorporate physics to the brain.

Thanks all! :)

There are plenty of physicists who are studying nervous systems at various levels (individual neurons, coupled neurons, retinal neurons, etc), either with mathematical modeling, computation or experiments. There's lots of modelling to be done to understand the basic physics of neural systems. As atyy mentioned, some models can employ field theory mathematical techniques (path integrals, etc), but that doesn't have anything to do with quantum mechanics. See, for example, the supplementary information of this paper (access will require you to log in through your university's library or be on their network).

People seem to have this idea that "We have no idea how consciousness really works!" and "We have no idea how quantum mechanics really works!" somehow imply that consciousness must somehow be related to quantum mechanics, but that's just not a good enough rationale to investigate a connection between the two. That hasn't stopped people from trying (e.g., Roger Penrose). The suggestions, since they are typically not guided by any sort of experiments, usually come off more as crazy fringe theories. Penrose and Osheroff(sp?)'s theory of quantum computation in the brain gained some traction for some reason (probably Penrose advocating it), but last I heard their proposal for the mechanism of quantum computation was shown experimentally to be physiologically unreasonable.

That said, there are sometimes places for quantum mechanics in biological studies (not necessarily the brain). For example, I believe quantum mechanics plays some role in photosynthesis (or at least models of it). Similarly, there has been research on quantum entanglement in cryptochrome in bird eyes, see this article, for example.

In sum, there's plenty of theoretical research to be done in neuroscience that use physics techniques, but it might not involve quantum mechanics.
 
  • #9
You may find this article interesting.

Abstract:
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. First, quantum effects do not have the temporal properties required for neural information processing. Second, there are substantial physical obstacles to any organic instantiation of quantum computation. Third, there is no psychological evidence that such mental phenomena as consciousness and mathematical thinking require explanation via quantum theory. We conclude that understanding brain function is unlikely to require quantum computation or similar mechanisms.

For other physicsy approaches, statistical mechanics, dynamical systems & chaos theory, information theory, network theory and classical electrodynamics have all been used to construct mathematical models of various brain functions.
 

1. Is it possible to relate Quantum field theory to the brain and understand how it works?

While there is ongoing research and speculation about the potential connections between Quantum field theory and the brain, it is currently not possible to definitively relate the two and fully understand how the brain works. The brain is a complex and dynamic organ, and there are still many mysteries surrounding its functions and processes.

2. Why is it important to explore the potential connection between Quantum field theory and the brain?

Exploring the potential connection between Quantum field theory and the brain can lead to new insights and understanding about the brain and its functions. It can also potentially pave the way for new advancements and technologies in the field of neuroscience.

3. What evidence is there to support the idea of linking Quantum field theory to the brain?

Currently, there is no concrete evidence to support the idea of linking Quantum field theory to the brain. The potential connections are based on theoretical models and hypotheses, and more research and evidence is needed to validate these ideas.

4. Are there any potential benefits to understanding the brain through the lens of Quantum field theory?

Understanding the brain through the lens of Quantum field theory can potentially provide new insights into the fundamental principles and mechanisms that govern the brain's functions. This can lead to advancements in fields such as artificial intelligence, brain-computer interfaces, and treatment of neurological disorders.

5. Are there any criticisms or challenges to the concept of relating Quantum field theory to the brain?

Yes, there are several criticisms and challenges to this concept. Some argue that the brain is too complex to be fully understood through the principles of Quantum field theory, while others question the validity of using a theory originally developed for the study of particles to explain the workings of a biological system. Additionally, there is a lack of empirical evidence to support this idea, making it a controversial topic in the scientific community.

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
13
Views
538
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
3
Replies
91
Views
5K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • Biology and Medical
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • Biology and Medical
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
3
Views
907
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
736
Replies
22
Views
2K
Back
Top