My personal criticism to Quantum theory and Human conscience

[alecrimi]

my personal criticism to "Quantum theory and Human conscience"

I have to do a couple of premises:
1. There are some previous posts on this arguments, among them I
found interesting this one:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=334994
2.This topic requires a deep knowledge in several fields, and I do not have deep knowleged in all these fields. So, feel free to correct me where I am wrong. Now let's go:

I have been again through http://www.quantumpsi.com/MR1139.appb.pdf,
and Quantum optical coherence in cytoskeletal microtubules, Jibu et al.
Some of the articles containig some material described in The emperor's new mind (I have never read deeply this book, so I limit myself about the articles).

I found interesting the discussion about quantum information and microtubes of neurons. Since it can highlight some limitations of state of art model such as the Hodgkin–Huxley model.

Instead I found relatively a twist (or maybe just a speculation), the Orchestrated Objective Reduction (or Quantum state reduction) about consciousness.
In neuroscience, the Mind is considered and emerging behaviour of the neural nets, even if there is no agreement where this emergence starts.
However, I found twisty arguing about precosciouss thoughts, existing as superimposition, which collaps to consciousness as a Wave function collapse. I think that consciousness is a much more complicate story;
and even if this collapse can be considered, we should have some better intuition of the reasons (e.g. some proof of neural activity somewhere, an increase of myelination... I am not proposing, just saying something).
I think it is too strong (and too easy) extend the superimposition concept to thought.

Moreover, the argumentation of anestesia as a lack of quantum interaction... I think they should have argumented a bit more this claim.
I have the impression that they describe seriously the quantum microtubes behavior (though it is largerly a theretical biology discussion), and then they generalize very easily to large scale concept such as conscience and anestesia. Do you agree with me ? Or did I miss some steps clarifying these jumps ?

 

[Demystifier]

The speculative ideas by Penrose and Hammeroff have been convincingly criticized by Max Tegmark:
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/quant-ph/9907009 [Phys.Rev.E61:4194-4206,2000]

 

[alecrimi]

Thank you. It looks interesting, I will try to digest it

 

[PatrickPowers]

Thank you. It looks interesting, I will try to digest it

Essentially he says that the human brain is too hot to harbor quantum coherence.

 

[StevieTNZ]

Isn't decoherence still superposition?

My email to Brian Greene:

I know decoherence suppresses interference with a quantum system (either microscopic or macroscopic) interacts with its environment, but in many books I’ve read, even though we get an equation that ‘averages out’ the possibilities of the wave function so we end up with what looks like a mixed state (e.g. for the statistical interpretation: 50% being in state A; 50% being in state B, for a group of quantum systems), the quantum system (or in the case of a group of quantum systems) is still in no definite state and still a pure (superposition) state. Is this true?

His response:

Yes, you are correct.