My View OnThe Brain/Mind/Counsiousness As A Quantum Computer

So alot of information out there about how the brain or human mind functions like a quantum computer. I would like to discuss this interesting topic and get some more information others may come by in thier own research.

It is my belief that this effect takes place even in atoms and particles and that we are quantum entangled with the entire universe. Lots of research out there on this subject, and this is an interesting topic as the Brain Initiative was kick off by Obama a while ago to attempt to understand the workings of the mind.

What's revealed at the leading edge of quantum physics and quantum biology is that your body is not just a biochemical system: it's also a "macroscopic quantum system." Quantum systems were believed to exist only at the submicroscopic level, where quanta are in the state known as "coherent," which means that they are able to get into synch with each other.
www.huffingtonpost.com...

I really don't think humanity will ever understand conscious in its entirety this side of the third dimension. We simply do not have the tools at our disposal or the method to create such tools.

Granted we are getting better at describing what consciousness is with regards to perception and we may even soon discover where it resides. But as to how it functions, in that respect I imagine we will remain in the dark until our own consciousness makes the journey aka we die.

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

I think a lot of consciousness has do with thinking that we are individuals and not one or entangled. The good part of this that even if an individual thinks on the terms of entanglement then they can embrace much more of the group consciousness. The mind becomes more aware and able to do much more in terms of what is considered paranormal. Nice post.

I don't think we could really understand all the tricks that evolution could have used.

There was once an experiment where hardware engineers used simulated evolution to build a new logic circuit to discriminate between two frequencies. They set up their design system to generate random logic circuits, evaluate them, sort them by performance, reject the worst 10%, and apply mutations to the best 10%. This was repeated until they were able to get the circuit to pass verification tests. Then the engineers built the real hardware logic. But the strange thing was that many of the components weren't connected together as you would expect from an engineer designed circuit. One of the problems with designing logic circuits is that "crosstalk" the electric fields generated by electrons moving along one wire, can induce signals in other adjacent wires. Avoiding this requires careful design. In the evolution designed circuits, the use of crosstalk was used heavily. Resonating magnetic fields would be generated whenever a matching frequency was detected and this would generate a signal.

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

If you are interested in consciousness, may I suggest a number of threads begun by member "Astrocyte " This members immersion into this and related fields appear to me to be far in advance of most others who visit ATS.

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

I'm in the middle of reading Science Set Free by Rupert Sheldrake which defines 10 dogmas of modern science and the refuted "fringe sciences" by modern science that better define the workings of consciousness.

This book should be required reading in the academic sciences.

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord
Lots of research out there on this subject

Then perhaps you would want to cite some of it, because the source you cited contains zero references to any scientific papers. It looks to me like a mixture of fact and fantasy (or claims some of which are supported and some of which are unsupported in real research).

If he's getting some of his information from Rupert Sheldrake who is mentioned by dezertdog, that source has little credibility in the scientific community.

An editorial in one of the most respected scientific journals, Nature, had this to say about Sheldrake's pseudoscience:

Rupert Sheldrake

...Sheldrake's book is a splendid illustration of the widespread public misconception of what science is about. In reality, Sheldrake's argument is in no sense a scientific argument but is an exercise in pseudo-science...

I don't see any real science here, but if you wish to discuss real science, then post some of the scientific research you mentioned.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

Lots of research out there on this subject

Then perhaps you would want to cite some of it, because the source you cited contains zero references to any scientific papers. It looks to me like a mixture of fact and fantasy (or claims some of which are supported and some of which are unsupported in real research).



If he's getting some of his information from Rupert Sheldrake who is mentioned by dezertdog, that source has little credibility in the scientific community.



An editorial in one of the most respected scientific journals, Nature, had this to say about Sheldrake's pseudoscience:



Rupert Sheldrake

...Sheldrake's book is a splendid illustration of the widespread public misconception of what science is about. In reality, Sheldrake's argument is in no sense a scientific argument but is an exercise in pseudo-science...

I don't see any real science here, but if you wish to discuss real science, then post some of the scientific research you mentioned.

Why dont you find some information on the quantum mind and post it for us, I dont need to do this for you, you can do it for yourself.

The quantum mind is not my original idea but I do believe it.

The idea of god is not my original idea but I do believe in god.

Love is not my original idea but I do believe in love.

The singularity is not my original idea but I do believe in the singularity.

I dont need to post information for you, I believe what I like, you believe what you like.

This thread isnt about me posting things for you to believe or refute, I am sharing my beliefs with those of like mind and even naysayers like yourself, everyone is capable of posting whatever they wish.

I believe god is the quantum mind and contains all things sure you can refute gods existance doesnt make it so, nor can you ever hope to debunk god.

I reccomend you research on what god is and how the human brain works before you go asking others to enlighten you on the subject only you can do that for yourself.

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

You've posted in the science and technology forum. The word science implies the existence of scientific evidence to support a hypothesis.

You have not provided any science to support what you are talking about. The blog post you have linked is by Ervin Laslo, "Systems philosopher, integral theorist, concert pianist", not a scientist.

In this forum it is expected that scientific evidence be provided as support. Perhaps you should have posted in a forum a bit more appropriate.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: FormOfTheLord



You've posted in the science and technology forum.



You have not provided any science to support what you are talking about. The blog post you have linked is by Ervin Laslo, "Systems philosopher, integral theorist, concert pianist", not a scientist.



In this forum it is expected that scientific evidence be provided as support. Perhaps you should have posted in a forum a bit more appropriate.

It is my opinion that the brain and how it works belongs in science and technology.

I will post some more information on how the brain works which I thought was well known.

I was also hoping others would contribute to the sharing of information on how the brain functions.

Something I am interested is Obamas Brain Initiative:

By accelerating the development and application of innovative technologies, researchers will be able to produce a revolutionary new dynamic picture of the brain that, for the first time, shows how individual cells and complex neural circuits interact in both time and space.

Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies
www.braininitiative.nih.gov...

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

It is my opinion that the brain and how it works belongs in science and technology.

An opinion is not evidence.

Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies

Where's the part about "quantum mind?" Do you know what the most basic idea of quantum theory is? Do you think there is a "brainion", a "mindion", "consciousion?" Do you have any evidence?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

It is my opinion that the brain and how it works belongs in science and technology.

An opinion is not evidence.

Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies

Where's the part about "quantum mind?" Do you know what the basic idea of quantum theory is? Do you think there is a "mindion", a "thinkion", "consciousion?" Do you have any evidence?

Well it does say it shows how individual cells and complex neural circuits interact in both time and space. Does that make sense to you? What do you mean evidence? The study of the brain is happening I just posted some evidence of that, theres alot more out there, I dont need to prove this research is being done theres nothing to prove. This is a fact.

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

Well it does say it shows how individual cells and complex neural circuits interact in both time and space.

Um. Isn't that obvious? What does it have to do with quantum mechanics? Do you think cells behave as quanta? What quantum states may a cell exist in? How can those states superpose?

The study of the brain is happening

Um. Of course it is. What does it have to do with quantum computing? Do you know the theory behind quantum computing?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

Well it does say it shows how individual cells and complex neural circuits interact in both time and space.

Um. Isn't that obvious? What does it have to do with quantum mechanics? Do you think cells behave as quanta?

The study of the brain is happening

Um. Of course it is. What does it have to do with quantum computing? Do you know the theory behind quantum computing?

Are you asking because you dont understand, or do you think I dont know, or have knowledge about quantum computing, space, and time? Are you asking to contribute to the thread or measure my intelligence.

What knowledge I may or may not, and my education is not something I am interested in discussing with you. I will discuss the brain in a friendly manner not what I consider to be a probe of my intellect, I have nothing to prove to anyone, I am simply discussing the brain and how we are comming to learn more of how it works in a friendly atmosphere.

I would ask you to state your contributions to the topic on how the brain works, I will state my own contributions in due time.

This is not about me and you its about an intelligent and I would hope enlightening discussion on the workings of the human mind.

a reply to: FormOfTheLord
You said that you believe the mind operates as a quantum computer. I asked if you know the theory behind quantum computing. If you want a scientific discussion rather than a metaphysical discussion, that would be a good place to start.

If you want a metaphysical discussion this is not the proper forum. If you are randomly tacking actual scientific theory onto metaphysics this is not the proper forum. Theosophy does not belong here.

a reply to: FormOfTheLord
Your source in the OP has the same problem as the movie "What the bleep do we know", which gives a reasonably accurate portrayal of the mechanics of the double slit experiment, then proceeds to infer that the electron must have consciousness to behave differently when it "knows" it's being observed. There is science behind the double slit experiment, but not behind the interpretation that it shows the electron is "aware" of when it's being observed or has any kind of consciousness. The movie doesn't seem to know when science fact ends and fantasy begins, and this is exactly the problem with your OP source.

Yes of course there is brain research being done, and it does support some limited claims in the OP article, however as far as I know it doesn't support some other claims, so once again we have a writer who likes to blur fact and fantasy, and apparently writes for an audience who doesn't know the difference and doesn't bother to check facts, by say looking for scientific sources. The source you supplied does say brain research is being done, of course that's a given. However it as I said only supports a limited number of claims in the OP article, and doesn't touch the main topic of your thread in the thread title at all.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

You said that you believe the mind operates as a quantum computer. I asked if you know the theory behind quantum computing. If you want a scientific discussion rather than a metaphysical discussion, that would be a good place to start.



If you want a metaphysical discussion this is not the proper forum.

If you would like to discuss the Brain Inititiave I would love to hear what you think on it. I believe that space and time and the workings of the human brain are very similar to a quantum computer. Many processes or neurons acting together to percieve space and time.

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

I believe that space and time and the workings of the human brain are very similar to a quantum computer. Many processes or neurons acting together to percieve space and time.

That is not a description of quantum computing. Digital computers use many transistors acting together to perform complex algorithms.
What makes you think a quantum computer would "perceive" anything?

You may find this interesting its about quantum coherence:

Since 2007 research has shown that quantum coherence is functional in increasing the efficiency of energy transfer in photosynthetic systems, including multicellular plants at room temperature. What has never been emphasised in discussions about this type of research is that similar systems to those utilising quantum coherence in plants are also present, in the form of mitochondria, in animal cells including neurons. Evolution has a tendency to retain features, so there is no reason to believe that it would not have retained the ability to utilise quantum coherence in animal cells, and thus in neurons. The intensive activity and integration involved in conscious processing thus looks a prime candidate for the more efficient energy transfer offered by quantum coherence.

quantum-mind.co.uk...

By all means do add some of your own research I am interested in knowledge when shared in a friendly manner, do you have any to share?

a reply to: FormOfTheLord
Another blog?
I see some facts about photosynthesis. And a random leap to a connection with neurological activity.

Do you know the theory behind quantum computing?

By all means do add some of your own research I am interested in knowledge when shared in a friendly manner, do you have any to share?

No. I don't do metaphysics.