It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Heronumber0
Oh dear melatonin. Fair enough , you have a right to hold functionalist and materialist abeliefs regarding the appearance of consciousness but you MUST admit that there are:
1 quantum effects in the way that inert anaesthetic gases interact with the hydrophobic pockets of tubulin molecules;
2 quantum effects seem to be important in the photoreaction of bacteriochlorophyll.
In other words melatonin, at each step so far quantum non-algorithmic computation seems to be involved in conciousness. Whether or not Hameroff and Penrose believe in the soul is irrelevant. They provide exactly what you guys want - scientific evidence. And they leave room for a spiritual non-physical element to assist in conscious moments. Can you argue with the science melatonin?
I just say that the Designer conferred us with consciousness or drives it in some way, allowing the Devil a route in to pervert us. Can you prove me wrong?
As I said, I'm sure quantum effects are involved in all kinds of stuff at molecular scales, and by extension in biomolecules.
The problem here is that Orch-OR is very, very speculative at almost every level, even for anesthetic action, which can be readily explained without quantum effects. But I don't dismiss it out of hand, just think we need to base this from the brain, rather than speculative physics.- melatonin
We don't even know that human behaviour is non-computable, just another assertion of the Orch-OR model. Indeed, it appears that some neural networks can predict behaviour. So, to relate this to speculative non-computable OR is tenuous at best.
Not really. It is assumed to. Much of the evidence is far from provided. What is good is that they have provided falsifiable predictions. But it is still quite a vacuous theory at this point. - melatonin
You can say what you like. But even if this theory is found to eventually be a good theory, it still won't support your theological position. Sorry that is the case. I'm sure the devil also perverts lugworms as well, with them possessing microtubules an all. - melatonin
I like how you say 'can you argue with the science...?', then go off into theology and ask me to disprove you. That's quite funny, didn't need the cheering up though, as 12-10 did the job
Italian astrophysicist Paola Zizzi (17) has suggested (in Emergent Consciousness: From the Early Universe to Our Mind] that during the inflationary period of the Big Bang, the entire universe was in superposition (there being no external environment to cause decoherence) which reached threshold for OR after 10-33 seconds, reducing to our present, single universe. The implication is that inflation ended with a cosmic OR event – a moment of consciousness – of which each of our present individual consciousnesses are literal microcosms. This idea has been referred to as the Big Wow theory.
Originally posted by Heronumber0
However, Hameroff has used Ockham's razor in his initial hypothesis that is 'anaesthetic action on hydrophobic pockets of dendritic brain proteins inhibit electron resonance' causing a lack of consciousness so that the mediation of consciousness involves such quantum effects. Moreover, the brain microtubules have unique complex array functions and a profusion of gap junction linked dendritic webs crucial to the theory.
I think you are referring to work which states that anaesthetics act upon ligand -gated ion channels or receptors. However, Hameroff et al assert that anaesthetics appear to have opposite effects on these channels including potentiation of excitatory channels or inhibitory effects, so that the field is still in confusion at this stage. Additionally Hameroff point out 'many drugs bind to these channels/receptors but do not cause anaesthesia'. This is not speculative physics but raw biochemistry.
The quantum effects on bacteriochlorophyll, for example, seem to point to a quantum choice of photons for particular efficient pathways for photosynthesis. There is solid, falsifiable/replicable/valid evidence to indicate that gamma synchrony EEG is a suitable correlate for consciousness. Loss of consciousness ties in with the disappearance of 'frontal posterior gamma EEG coherence' (Hameroff).
The dendritic depolarisation events and synchrony seem to have been confirmed by many studies melatonin. We have reproducibility and potential hypothesis falsifiability rolled into one neat package. This does not seem like quantum waffle to me - albeit as a non-neuroscientist. Moreover, there are numerous studies to show that 'dendritic-dendritic gap junction circuits of cortical interneurones and selected primary neurones in concert with GABA inhinitory chemical synapses specifically mediate gamma synchrony' (Hameroff) - is this not the same place that the Orch OR events occur? Mere coincidence or verifiable/falsifiable work?
I have to disagree here. The above valid and reliable evidence seems to point to the OrchOR theory as having some validity.
Yes but do you have the same neurophysiological umiquness that you have in the human brain in terms of dendritic gap junctions, actin microfilament networks, tubulin numbers or the coherence caused by pumping heat?
Does it support my theological position? It certainly does not dismiss it, which is the beauty of it.
That was rather silly of me. However I can't help making the connection because the OrchOR model leaves it wide open. Cyfre and possibly Multi 1's consider the original OR moment from the inception of the Universe and have a point:
As for the 12-10 score - good luck and who would have believed it? However most Scots will be supporting anybody who plays against England.
Originally posted by Heronumber0
Darkside and melatonin. I take your points on board and I would never wish to get into a detailed argument with a PhD neuroscientist melatonin because I don't have the neurophysiological knowledge required
Oh, no. Don't defer to me. I have issues with Hameroff's ideas, but I really don't dismiss it completely. I think there is a possibility that microtubules do something important in the brain. But I just can't see how that is a sufficient answer to explain the sort of hard problem of consciousness that Chalmers thinks is a big issue. It really does seem a cop-out. I could see microtubules being involved alongside neurons and all the classical stuff which together result in this thing we call consciousness. It needn't be one or t'other.
Is it possible that the hard problem is hard because it's not a problem?
I'll try to answer the rest later. Tea-time and then rugby to attend to.
Originally posted by Heronumber0
OK, OK. I thought I was punching above my weight here - my field is biochemistry and molecular biology.
However, I tried to make the point that there IS real science that supports the OrchOR model and that there is a case to be made for a soul to give subjective experience to an individual although it is a hard point to explain using OR. I just thought that turning to epiphenomenal events was a cop-out, like saying that human experience is similar to the foam in a washing up bowl. However, putting the AI problem on centre stage, it appeals to me to think that computer algorithms cannot copy complex human actions or thoughts.
I agree that there is no direct evidence for OR but it is valid as a quantum theory, no? Does quantum theory not need to be rewritten anyway? If we consider that the tubulins act as qubits and that the superpositioned masses in geometric space time can be described by by the indeterminacy principle and that E=h/t with E =mass of superpositioned tubulins; h = reduced Planck constant and t=time for OR (a conscious moment) to occur, then 't' tallies with actual numbers of tubulins in dendritic microtubules and the time required for one cycle of gamma synchrony - 25 milliseconds.
I like the fact that the mechanism implies quantum computation to underly normal neurological events so, yes, it does not matter which mechanism as long as the output is the same.
High intensity conscious experience in Tibetan monks causes high frequency and coherence (high E and low t) gamma EEG synchrony (Lutz et al , 2004) which seems to be an indirect measure to show the appearance of OR. Also Tegmark in his rebuttal ignored the means available for microtubules to avoid decoherence and therefore ended up in erroneous calculation of the time required for formation of a conscious moment.
Finally, at the moment, for evidence of gamma synchrony involving gap junctions see Fukuda et al , 2006. You will have to search these up though - sorry about that. I'll compile a proper list later.
However, there is the possibility that consciousness occurs by other means in other organisms, but that it is a different, non human sort of consciousness. I would still stand by my last post then
Incidentally melatonin, the microtubule model insinuates into the classical model - they are not mutually exclusive if I read it properly.