Do plants have a brain,i mean how do they think or react?

[jhae2.718]

... I am disappointed that you all believe that this is my own crackpot theory when its just what iv'e heard and read on the internet. and you can never be 100% sure there's always goin to be a lot more to nature than we think.

It may not be your own crackpot theory, but it is a crackpot theory with no scientific basis, and there's no need to repeat it here. The Internet is far from the most accurate of sources. While there is a lot of good information on the Internet, there's an extremely high noise to signal ratio.

Everyone has a basic understanding of Quantum physics. i don't see the problem with throwing the word around. no one is trying to be arrogant!

Actually very few people fully understand quantum mechanics. In these situations, "quantum" becomes a meaningless buzzword without any scientific significance.

 

[Roysun]

hm well none the less these are topics i need to study on more. but it truly seems that existence is a lot more than just particle and energy connections.

 

[Pythagorean]

There's evidence for plants utilizing quantum mechanics for photosynthesis:
http://sitemason.vanderbilt.edu/files/iqLVYI/Fleming 2004 Nature 431 256.pdf

The philosophy you're implying is called "panpsychism" and as you can see, it's not a very popular view. But any question of whether other things (animals, plants, weather, rocks) have a subjective experience is not really a biological question at this point. These kinds of discussion take place in the philosophy forums instead.

We have absolutely no idea what's special about our matter/energy configuration that allows us to have subjective experiences. In the philosophy forum, topics like panpsychism come up, but there's also an interest in more tangible approaches, like information theory. You would find more productive answers to your inquiries there (but don't go too fast, quantum consciousness is considered "crackpot" even by most neurophilosophers).

 

[Roysun]

There's evidence for plants utilizing quantum mechanics for photosynthesis:
http://sitemason.vanderbilt.edu/files/iqLVYI/Fleming 2004 Nature 431 256.pdf

The philosophy you're implying is called "panpsychism" and as you can see, it's not a very popular view. But any question of whether other things (animals, plants, weather, rocks) have a subjective experience is not really a biological question at this point. These kinds of discussion take place in the philosophy forums instead.

We have absolutely no idea what's special about our matter/energy configuration that allows us to have subjective experiences. In the philosophy forum, topics like panpsychism come up, but there's also an interest in more tangible approaches, like information theory. You would find more productive answers to your inquiries there (but don't go too fast, quantum consciousness is considered "crackpot" even by most neurophilosophers).

im new to this whole site and i had no idea that there was a philosophy forum. could you locate it for me?

 

[JaredJames]

im new to this whole site and i had no idea that there was a philosophy forum. could you locate it for me?

https://www.physicsforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=112

Make sure you read the rules before launching into anything. They were changed recently and made strict to ensure quality posting.

 

[Pythagorean]

im new to this whole site and i had no idea that there was a philosophy forum. could you locate it for me?

it's a subforum within the "General Discussion" subforum almost at the bottom of the main forum page. So a subsubforum :)

 

[Ryan_m_b]

it truly seems that existence is a lot more than just particle and energy connections.

What makes you say that? I really don't see the need for quantum physics to be involved in consciousness anymore than it is involved in any macroscale science

 

[Roysun]

What makes you say that? I really don't see the need for quantum physics to be involved in consciousness anymore than it is involved in any macroscale science

it does because we all hear much about astrology, psychics, spirits and the paranormal including intuition. there must be things in existence that just isn't comprehendable. everything exists for a reason so how and why would people speak on the paranormal.

 

[JaredJames]

it does because we all hear much about astrology, psychics, spirits and the paranormal including intuition. there must be things in existence that just isn't comprehendable. everything exists for a reason so how and why would people speak on the paranormal.

People like to make things up, especially if it makes them money. That's why people do it, that's the motivation. Oh no, have I spoilt your fantasy that it's all real?

There is zero evidence for the paranormal or anything you list above existing.

 

[micromass]

it does because we all hear much about astrology, psychics, spirits and the paranormal including intuition.

Yes, of course we have all heard about it. And if you look it up on the internet, then you would find billions of sites about it. But we've also heard of vampires and werewolves. Do you think those things are real.

There is absolutely NO evidence for paranormal phenomena. So if you think scientifically, then these things do not exist. Fine, believe in it if it makes you happy, but that doesn't make it real.

there must be things in existence that just isn't comprehendable. everything exists for a reason

Why would everything exist for a reason? I've heard a lot of people saying that, but I could never comprehend people saying that. Things exist because they exist, why do there have to be a reason behind everything?

 

[Borek]

Topic locked, everything that should be said was already said.