Is consciousness to be found in quantum processes in microtubules?

[Write4U]

Exactly!! This is nothing new!
There was a huge wave of enthusiasm among biologists and other scientists 30 years ago. However, it became clear quickly that it didn't work.
You don't hear much about it today not because they haven't looked at it, but because scientists don't publish null results.
No legit scienstist wants to publish (even negative results) on a controversial topic already falsified or doesn't work in the lab. They will lose their scientific credibility as they will fall in the same category as astrologists, people that believe metals and other elements have magic properties, etc

Question: are you a neural scientist?
I ask because your statement that we do not hear much about microtubules? Where have you been?
Google "microtubules". I think you'll find maybe 10 pages of links to scientific studies of microtubules and what they do. This is not old science, it is new science.

The proposed synaptic connection with consciousness is old science. Is that why we don't hear much about that anymore?

 

[exchemist]

Penrose's mind is a bad violin? I find that analogy amusing in view that Penrose is the author of "ORCH OR" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orchestrated_objective_reduction
There is no evidence that consciousness is a product of connections between neurons. (unless you want posit that quantum may play a role here)....
Yes, that's how science advances, intuition based on available information. Has to be woo, no? I could probably come up with a falsification of this current speculation.
Why do we not hear from you on this? Any and all contributions of substance are welcome.

You have just heard from me. Penrose and Hameroff's ideas have gone nowhere, as I have just pointed out. And yes, your entirely unsubstantiated woolly notions about "computation" are quantum woo.

It's all just part of your foolish and obsessive worship of mathematics.

 

[globali]

Question: are you a neural scientist?
I ask because your statement that we do not hear much about microtubules? Where have you been?
Google "microtubules". I think you'll find maybe 10 pages of links to scientific studies of microtubules and what they do. This is not old science, it is new science.

The proposed synaptic connection with consciousness is old science. Is that why we don't hear much about that anymore?

Of course microtubules are real and tons of work is being made every single day!

I like your way of thinking!
It basically goes like this:
-There was a University Professor named AB back in the 50ies who proposed an interesting theory that octopuses are made in such a way structurally that they can comminucate with aliens.
-What? This was discredited.
-What exactly was discredited? That octopuses exist? Here are 10 pictures of octopuses and 5 links from wikipedia about the structure of octopuses.
-This is bs
-What? You are saying that AB was a crackpot? He was a University Professor. Are you any better? How can you say that?
(Of course you omit to mention all the other experts that believe AB's ideas were wrong)

 

[Write4U]

Our brains

You have just heard from me. Penrose and Hameroff's ideas have gone nowhere, as I have just pointed out. And yes, your entirely unsubstantiated woolly notions about "computation" are quantum woo.

It's all just part of your foolish and obsessive worship of mathematics.

I'm sure you consider Daniel Dennett a woo-monger?

You just see the term computer from a purely artificial perspective. Binary Calculus.

I see "computer" as any processor of information and controller of the result. I just learned this is Daniel Dennett's view as well. A brain is an organic computer. It takes-in information and controls the result. It's a "neck-top"..... Biological Calculus.

If the brain is a computer then it must have ability to receive information, process the values and patterns of the information, and control the response to this "perception" of reality.

In the end it is evolution of survival mechanisms, and this process requires computation . All other more esoteric endeavors emerged from our ability to process external information and take appropriate survival action.

All evolutionary improvements of computation skills, from a paramecium to Einstein, are a result of gradual improvements in survival skills.

"Fight or Flight" are the fundamental survival responses. Anticipation (imagination) is the most refined forms of survival skill. Existential Calculus.

 

[iceaura]

And how do you translate a brainwave into a picture of a barn? From memory, no?

Brainwaves as linked do not incorporate pictures of barns.

Memory is stored in microtubules in the brain.

A memory is an action - a behavior - of the brain, involving large scale patterns of neurons firing and synapses connecting and microtubules doing whatever they do according to the way they are set. It is not "stored" anywhere in particular, any more than making a fist is "stored" in your hand.

If you remove a microtubule from a human brain and describe its structure and composition completely, you will not find a memory or anything anyone can "translate" as a memory anywhere in it.

Have you watched Anil Seth yet?

I don't watch videos of arguments or essays. Transcript? Article? Book?

Synapses are no more than electrical sockets for plugging in light bulbs or powering a computer.

Irrelevant. In relationship to the mind, all the material structures of the brain are substrate - consciousness is pattern.
If you drug someone so their synapses don't work, they will lose consciousness - patterns require substrates.

 

[Write4U]

I like your way of thinking!

Thank you.
The rest is not relevant.

p.s. Octopi are good people!

 

[Write4U]

It is not "stored" anywhere in particular, any more than making a fist is "stored" in your hand.

The abstract image of a fist is stored in your memory.
Ever had a dream? From where do you think you can create an imaginary reality in your dreams. No external input.

Irrelevant. In relationship to the mind, all the material structures of the brain are substrate - consciousness is pattern.

I agree!!! Pattern recognition. Microtubules are very good at that

If you drug someone so their synapses don't work, they will lose consciousness - patterns require substrates

I agree!!! But we must first ask "which synapses"? Can't very well drug the microtubules that control your life functions.

OTOH, Microtubular pyramids are the substrate from which patterns are retrieved. And in a bio-chemical computer, if you confuse the electro-chemical signals, the computer will shut down. Except for the brain parts that control life functions.

If you remove a microtubule from a human brain and describe its structure and composition completely, you will not find a memory or anything anyone can "translate" as a memory anywhere in it.

No, what you are describing is the structure of the individual processor, which do not retain memory except for very short times. The question should ask what if you remove a microtubular pyramid? You will find a perfect storage facility of electro-chemical "words" which can be accessed when needed. This is where I conjecture a form of hive mind with quorum sensing abilities, which leads to conscious experience.

If you had watched the video you'd know what I'm talking about and will have learned about microtubular versatility in processing information and controlling powers when arrayed in a pyramidal pattern.

 

[Write4U]

Brainwaves as linked do not incorporate pictures of barns.

That's a strange posit. What linked brain waves? What pictures?
I was asking if you now subscribe to quantum functions in the brain?

But you are correct, brainwaves do not incorporate a specific picture of a barn. Memory presents an expectation of what type of barn. A best guess from a "brain in a vat".
It's all in pattern recognition of individual properties and mentally pasting them into a controlled hallucination.

Perhaps the pyramidal structure of the memory modules aids in the "flow of information" from microtubule to microtubule inside the pyramid.

 

[Write4U]

Just for reference. It may be pertinent, and it is my thread.....

This is the first I have listened to Dennett and he presents
some very interesting perspectives.

 

[exchemist]

Our brains

I'm sure you consider Daniel Dennett a woo-monger?

You just see the term computer from a purely artificial perspective. Binary Calculus.

I see "computer" as any processor of information and controller of the result. I just learned this is Daniel Dennett's view as well. A brain is an organic computer. It takes-in information and controls the result. It's a "neck-top"..... Biological Calculus.

If the brain is a computer then it must have ability to receive information, process the values and patterns of the information, and control the response to this "perception" of reality.

In the end it is evolution of survival mechanisms, and this process requires computation . All other more esoteric endeavors emerged from our ability to process external information and take appropriate survival action.

All evolutionary improvements of computation skills, from a paramecium to Einstein, are a result of gradual improvements in survival skills.

"Fight or Flight" are the fundamental survival responses. Anticipation (imagination) is the most refined forms of survival skill. Existential Calculus.

Evidently we can add calculus to the lengthening list of mathematical terms that you do not understand.

I'm afraid this is just hopeless. You have no idea what you are talking about, to such a degree that is it not even possible to argue with you.

 

[Write4U]

Evidently we can add calculus to the lengthening list of mathematical terms that you do not understand.

I'm afraid this is just hopeless. You have no idea what you are talking about, to such a degree that is it not even possible to argue with you.

Well, I would say that you may want to reference the dictionary once in awhile.

Calculus, originally called infinitesimal calculus or "the calculus of infinitesimals", is the mathematical study of continuous change, in the same way that geometry is the study of shape and algebra is the study of generalizations of arithmetic operations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calculus

Computation is any type of calculation[1][2] that includes both arithmetical and non-arithmetical steps and follows a well-defined model, for example an algorithm.
The study of computation is paramount (hypernymous) to the discipline of computer science.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computation

Petty argument, completely irrelevant to a discussion of consciousness.

 

[iceaura]

The abstract image of a fist is stored in your memory.

Memories, like fists, are not stored.

 

[Write4U]

Memories, like fists, are not stored.

That's just plain BS! I know where a fist can be stored......

Then tell me how you can imagine things without using your senses. All of a sudden your synapses begin firing? On what input?

Point is that you are wrong, and if you had watched any of the videos I offered, you'd understand how the memory neurons store information. What I post is not from my imagination but learned from demonstrated scientific fact.

You ask for proofs, I provide proofs, you refuse to look at the proofs, you accuse me of not providing proofs, I don't believe that's how falsification works.

p.s. I just posted a picture of the memory neurons consisting of a bunch of microtubules arranged into a pyramidal structure. (post #208).

Watch what Hameroff has to say before you condemn the hypothesis. It is so easy to brand someone as a crank and it is rude and devoid of common courtesy. Dr. Stuart Hameroff is a Professor of Anesthesiology and Psychology, and Director of the Center for Consciousness Studies at the University of Arizona. 20 years of study and research does command some respect, no?

 

[Write4U]

Penrose and Hameroff's ideas have gone nowhere

Where exactly should their ideas have gone? To the patent office? In the public domain for a wider research and discussion platform?
Here it is!

p.s. How long did it take for Darwin to publish, for Einstein to be proved correct on gravity? How much resistance they received in the mean time? It's disappointing to see not much has changed.

I find it amusing that all the supposed analogies offered by the critics are truly woo and completely disconnected from any semblance to the facts stated by the expert researchers which I offered for good measure.

OTOH, it makes me sad to find such ignorance placing blame for absolutely no scientific reason whatever. It reminds me of the fate Hypatia suffered at the hands of supposedly pious people. They accused her of witchcraft and tore her to pieces on the steps of the great library of Alexandria. Typical of ignorant people being presented a new idea that may replace "common mainstream beliefs".

Kinda reminds me of what is happening here..........too sad.

 

[Write4U]

exchemist said: ↑
Penrose and Hameroff's ideas have gone nowhere

But YOU cannot cite Tegmark as a bona fide critic. You have already cast doubt on Tegmark's own research and called his hypothesis woo.

Now you are going to drag his name in here to prove Hameroff and Penrose wrong?
That's duplicitous and duplicity is not allowed in science!

 

[Bells]

OTOH, it makes me sad to find such ignorance placing blame for absolutely no scientific reason whatever. It reminds me of the fate Hypatia suffered at the hands of supposedly pious people. They accused her of witchcraft and tore her to pieces on the steps of the great library of Alexandria. Typical of ignorant people being presented a new idea that may replace "common mainstream beliefs".

Kinda reminds me of what is happening here..........too sad.

Yes, because not taking your obsession seriously is the similar and reminiscent of dragging a woman out into the street, beat her to death, cut out her eyeballs, dismembered her and then dragged her limbs down the street to be burned.

Has it occurred to you that the reason people here are are not taking you seriously because you are resorting to such tactics and measures that make you come across as someone obsessed and dare I say it, kooky?

No one here is denying the importance of microtubules. However, you are going above and beyond.

Let me ask you a question.. When you buy a car, do you praise the car? Or the delivery truck that brought the car to your local car yard?

 

[Write4U]

Yes, because not taking your obsession seriously is the similar and reminiscent of dragging a woman out into the street, beat her to death, cut out her eyeballs, dismembered her and then dragged her limbs down the street to be burned.

No it is not the same at all. That is a patently false statement. How dare you compare me with a murderous mob. It is you who is acting like that.

Has it occurred to you that the reason people here are are not taking you seriously because you are resorting to such tactics and measures that make you come across as someone obsessed and dare I say it, kooky?

What are you talking about? How many times do I have to qualify that this is a promising hypothesis? And you call this kooky, what are you talking about. You are the one displaying a mob mentality, certainly not an independent objective thinker.

Is calling something promising a tactic? Those are the words of a kooky person? Are you insane? Next you'll be drawing and quartering me in the village square, shouting he's kooky, he's kooky , off with his head!!!

No one here is denying the importance of microtubules.

With exception of a few posters who have done some research in the matter, everybody is underestimating (denying) the importance of microtubules, without any in-depth research.

Cell division (mitosis) is a microtubular function, how important do you want to get? Think!

Making two cells from the information contained in one cell is a remarkable creative computing ability . That is important in context of this discussion, IMHO.

Dennett has more to say about that.

Moreover the rejection and ridicule is purely ad hominem and I'm surprised you have not yet called a few on that fact.

However, you are going above and beyond.

Show me where.

Let me ask you a question.. When you buy a car, do you praise the car? Or the delivery truck that brought the car to your local car yard?

And you are citing buying a car as pertinent to the concept that a billion microtubules may form a kind of hive-mind with an emergent consciousness? Are you insane? Every analogy offered to disprove anything I have said is completely off the mark and going above and beyond what is called for in a serious discussion of existing science. Ad homs are never productive and I am seriously disturbed at the fact that you are not only supporting the insults but are piling on to boot. It does not do you credit.
If you call this moderating, you may want to reconsider your position. I call it insulting.

It makes me seriously consider quitting this forum if it were not for some kindred souls who seem to make an effort to understand what I am trying to convey. This petty and wholly unnecessary derogatory name-calling is not acceptable.

If you want to prove me wrong, prove me wrong with facts and links to the science. I make it a point to provide access to the science. I am very accommodating. And I have been criticized for that as well.
"Damned if I do, damned if I don't".

But don't call me stupid or compare me with a mob who kills scientists. That is more like you are describing your actions, not mine.

And don't tell me about the delivery of a car, unless you want to introduce a self-driving car which delivers itself and says "you're welcome", when you praise it and if that constitutes a form of intelligence. Now that would add to the conversation of emergent intelligence or even consciousness.....

 

[Write4U]

Here is a nice tidbit.

A Vertical Leap for Microchips
Engineers have discovered a way to pack more computing power into microcircuits: build them vertically as well as horizontally

http://www.gregorme.com/patents/wo9910766 prior art/3d circuits/Scientific American A Vertical Leap for Microchips.htm

Looking at a vertical microchip I see a remarkable resemblance with a vertical microtubule. One is an artifacial computer, the other a biochemical computer.

Note the hundreds of microtubules inside the axon terminating at the synapses ? Multiply by a few billion and we're getting close to a sophisticated communication network. Maybe even produce a sense of self.

Below the beautiful dynamical spiral structure of the microtubule consisting of only two chemical tubulins which grow and shrink and offer the computational highways (scaffolding, hardware) for distribution of biological information.

It looks like a computer, it functions like a computer, it yields predictable results like a computer. Could it be a biological computer? IF NOT, WHY NOT?

Can evolution result in the formation of a biological computer? The flagella argues in favor. Would natural selection favor a multitasking computer over other single purpose methods? Ability for multitasking offers a survial advantage, no? Microtubules are versatile! They can compute.

 

[Write4U]

One is an artificial computer, the other a biochemical computer.

Addendum:
One is barely half a century in the making, the other several billion years, at least on earth.

 

[Bells]

No it is not the same at all. That is a patently false statement. How dare you compare me with a murderous mob. It is you who is acting like that.

Reading and comprehension is tricky, eh?

What are you talking about? How many times do I have to qualify that this is a promising hypothesis? And you call this kooky, what are you talking about. You are the one displaying a mob mentality, certainly not an independent objective thinker.

Let me know if you are going to compare yourself to Hypatia again, because I will be taking a screenshot..

Is calling something promising a tactic? Those are the words of a kooky person? Are you insane? Next you'll be drawing and quartering me in the village square, shouting he's kooky, he's kooky , off with his head!!!

Screenshot!

You are the Rosa Parks of microtubules. A true hero in these dark times...

With exception of a few posters who have done some research in the matter, everybody is underestimating (denying) the importance of microtubules, without any in-depth research.

Cell division (mitosis) is a microtubular function, how important do you want to get? Think!

Making two cells from the information contained in one cell is a remarkable creative computing ability . That is important in context of this discussion, IMHO.

Oh for goodness sake's man!

Get a grip of yourself!

You are carrying on as though microtubules are more important than chromosome or any other part of a cell or body.

It is a transportation system (did you miss that part with the car analogy?). Yes, it serves an important function, but that does not mean that one loses one's proverbial shit about it as you are repeatedly doing.

Moreover the rejection and ridicule is purely ad hominem and I'm surprised you have not yet called a few on that fact.

I don't know, I guess I am still amused that you are questioning my sanity, suggesting I would treat you like Hypatia and then watching you complain about ad hominem's..

Show me where.

Basically any response you have made on the subject of microtubules.. Just look at this current page as one example..

Or this:

And you are citing buying a car as pertinent to the concept that a billion microtubules may form a kind of hive-mind with an emergent consciousness?

I'm sorry what?

Are you seriously suggesting that microtubules can evolve to being an emergent consciousness with a hive mind?

Are you seriously suggesting that the role of microtubules is not determined by genes but that they somehow or other act independently and of their own volition and can do so?

Are you insane?

For questioning your obsession and frankly weird claims and comments?

Every analogy offered to disprove anything I have said is completely off the mark and going above and beyond what is called for in a serious discussion of existing science.

This is existing science?

a billion microtubules may form a kind of hive-mind with an emergent consciousness?

Or just a proverbial wet dream?

I'm curious?

Because thus far, you have taken existing science and blown it so far out of proportion that it has become a running joke.

Ad homs are never productive and I am seriously disturbed at the fact that you are not only supporting the insults but are piling on to boot. It does not do you credit.
If you call this moderating, you may want to reconsider your position. I call it insulting.

I provided you with an analogy. In other words, what is more important, the gene or the transportation system?

You are losing your mind because you feel that it is not taking microtubules seriously enough.. You have questioned my sanity numerous times, completely and deliberately misrepresented what I said to mean something else entirely and then compared yourself again to Hypatia and I to the mob that murdered her so viciously, cut out her eyeballs, dismembered her, and then set her dismembered limbs on fire. And you are insulted?

If you want to prove me wrong, prove me wrong with facts and links to the science. I make it a point to provide access to the science. I am very accommodating. And I have been criticized for that as well.
"Damned if I do, damned if I don't".

I am questioning why you are so obsessed with microtubules to the point where you are literally coming out with this sort of stuff:

a billion microtubules may form a kind of hive-mind with an emergent consciousness?

And why you feel so hard done by because few are taking you seriously?

You are providing links to videos and wikipedia mostly and then getting snooty when people don't watch the videos..

But don't call me stupid or compare me with a mob who kills scientists. That is more like you are describing your actions, not mine.

I did not actually do that.

If you calmed down and read what I said, you would clearly see that I did not call you stupid, nor did I compare you to a murderous mob (which you have compared me and others here to).. Quite the contrary..

My comment was in response to your overblown reaction and comparing yourself to Hypatia.. In other words, I was pointing out that you are so obsessed and upset that people are not taking you seriously (because you are so obsessed) that you are comparing yourself to Hypatia.. That somehow, our not taking your obsession seriously was on par with the horrific and murderous crime committed against Hypatia and that is what my comment was about.. Pointing out the ridiculous nature of such a comparison.

And don't tell me about the delivery of a car, unless you want to introduce a self-driving car which delivers itself and says "you're welcome", when you praise it and if that constitutes a form of intelligence. Now that would add to the conversation of emergent intelligence or even consciousness.....

The next generation Tesla's may be close..

Microtubules is essentially a transportation system. Its functions is determined by the genes. While it's role is important, it is not more important than any other like you are making it out to be.