Are Quantum Processes Responsible for Brain Functions and Consciousness?

  • Thread starter Thread starter .Scott
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proton
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the potential role of quantum processes in brain functions and consciousness, particularly in light of recent experiments involving proton spins in "brain water." Participants explore the implications of these findings and the interpretations of quantum mechanics in relation to cognitive processes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants reference experiments that suggest entangled spins in brain water may correlate with cognitive functions, proposing that quantum processes could be integral to consciousness.
  • Others express skepticism about the interpretations of the data, questioning whether the findings genuinely support the idea of quantum processes being utilized in thought processing.
  • There is a discussion about the historical context of quantum theories in the brain, with references to Penrose's theories on microtubules and the potential for other quantum mechanisms.
  • Some participants argue that while quantum processes exist in chemical reactions within the brain, it remains uncertain whether these processes are directly involved in cognitive functions.
  • One participant draws an analogy between finding entangled proton spins and identifying functional components in a computer, suggesting that while evidence of quantum processes exists, it does not confirm their role in thought processing.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally do not reach consensus, as multiple competing views remain regarding the significance and interpretation of quantum processes in the brain. Some assert the existence of quantum processes, while others debate their relevance to consciousness and cognitive functions.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in the interpretation of experimental data and the need for clearer definitions regarding what constitutes "measurable quantum processes" in the context of brain function.

.Scott
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Messages
3,900
Reaction score
1,957
From phys.org:

"For our experiments we used proton spins of 'brain water' as the known system. 'Brain water' builds up naturally as fluid in our brains and the proton spins can be measured using MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging). Then, by using a specific MRI design to seek entangled spins, we found MRI signals that resemble heartbeat evoked potentials, a form of EEG signals.

Dr. Kerskens added, "If entanglement is the only possible explanation here then that would mean that brain processes must have interacted with the nuclear spins, mediating the entanglement between the nuclear spins. As a result, we can deduce that those brain functions must be quantum. "Because these brain functions were also correlated to short-term memory performance and conscious awareness, it is likely that those quantum processes are an important part of our cognitive and conscious brain functions.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: hutchphd
Biology news on Phys.org
Its alive, its alive, its alive...! This is worth a look if only to pick apart. Of course the kicker is from Dr. Kerskens "If entanglement is the only possible explanation..."
So they look at the spin spin decay (or linewidth) and try to correlate it to conscious processes. Perhaps they tortured the data into submission...I suspect not ... but they deserve applause for the attempt. Here is the actual paper:

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/2399-6528/ac94be/pdf
 
It seems to me the question should be is there or is there not measurable quantum processes in the brain. The authors might get the interpretation wrong and still be right on the larger point that the brain is non-classical. Penrose has been saying that for decades. Does this work confirm that point or are the authors measuring something entirely spurious?
 
bob012345 said:
Penrose has been saying that for decades. Does this work confirm that point or are the authors measuring something entirely spurious?
Penrose picked microtubules and "Orch-OR". I am much more excited about this "brain water". I strikes me as a much more employable component. I also suspect that there are many independent "consciousness circuits" each one based on Grover's Algorithm.
 
bob012345 said:
It seems to me the question should be is there or is there not measurable quantum processes in the brain.
With respect; what in living heck does that mean?
Of course there are quantum processes in the brain. Every chemical reaction is a "quantum process". Perhaps you could be a bit more definite.

I never bet against Sir Roger . He has a spectacular intellect.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bob012345 and BillTre
hutchphd said:
With respect; what in living heck does that mean?
Of course there are quantum processes in the brain. Every chemical reaction is a "quantum process". Perhaps you could be a bit more definite.

I never bet against Sir Roger . He has a spectacular intellect.
I'm sure @bob012345 meant whether there are quantum processes that are directly used to process "thoughtful" information. So if you looked at a computer, you could quickly determine that there were metal components, some of which carried electric current. But determining if any of them carry information would require a more detailed check.

To extend the analogy, finding entangled proton spins in the brain would be like finding functional semiconductors in the computer. It still doesn't mean that those protons are used for directly processing our thoughts, but it indicates that potential QM thought processing mechanisms are available.

This is a big jump from opinions that have claimed that the brain was too wet and warm for useful entanglement. Especially being that the protons are in the wettest and warmest parts.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bob012345
hutchphd said:
With respect; what in living heck does that mean?
Of course there are quantum processes in the brain. Every chemical reaction is a "quantum process". Perhaps you could be a bit more definite.

I never bet against Sir Roger . He has a spectacular intellect.
Like @.Scott said, whether the process Penrose discusses in his books or something else, I meant if it can be identified that the brain is actually quantum computing with such a process vs. just detecting quantum processes in the fluids due to Chemistry.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
20K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K