Is consciousness to be found in quantum processes in microtubules?

[globali]

We never disagreed........
Human mathematics are a product of human cognition and symbolization of universal mathematical values and functions of physical objects.

Therefore we can functionally apply the term Mathematical as an essential property of the Universe. It is a term understood by all and generalized as properties of all Universal physical objects, their functional interactions, and self-forming patterns.

The Universe is essentially mathematical as well as physical. Humans discovered those pre-existing facts. Our greatest "discovery".

....
........You are saying the obvious here. This is not something deep.


What does this has to do with microtubules having consciousness through quantum effects?
Or how does this relate to minerals if left together for a long time, they will self-organize to life?
Both were experimentally disproven.
And no, they are not logical consequences of the fact that the universe can be represented mathematically. (This is not something deep either!!!)
You are making (il)logical jumps.
And no, your references and videos you post prove nothing...

 

[Write4U]

....
........You are saying the obvious here. This is not something deep.

I am not claiming mystery and mystique.

What does this has to do with microtubules having consciousness through quantum effects?

Ask Penrose.

Or how does this relate to minerals if left together for a long time, they will self-organize to life?
Both were experimentally disproven.

Wrong! Abiogenesis is a fact. No mystery or mystique.
Are you an afficionado of Intelligent Design, per chance?

And no, they are not logical consequences of the fact that the universe can be represented mathematically. (This is not something deep either!!!) You are making (il)logical jumps.

And pray tell, how can the universe be represented? And where is the illogicality in that?

And no, your references and videos you post prove nothing...

They are not MY videos. I selected them for content by established and (largely) respected scientists. If you feel THEY have nothing to teach you, I certainly cannot help you......

 

[exchemist]

And here we start, once again, recycling the mathematical mysticism that Write4U goes in for.

You and I, I suspect, would take the view of rpenner, among others, in viewing mathematics as the stuff out which we build our human models of physical phenomena, and insert rpenner's caveat that the map is not the territory.

There, that should put another 50p in the slot and keep the pinball rebounding for another couple of pages.

So.......Ting! Ting! chugga chugga chugga.....

and hey presto another 2 pages on Write4U's beliefs about mathematics as Creator.

 

[Write4U]

So.......Ting! Ting! chugga chugga chugga.....

So is this reponse by you.

and hey presto another 2 pages on Write4U's beliefs about mathematics as Creator.

Mathematics as what? Creator of what, physical patterns, abiogenesis? Anything other than mathematics and It gets mystical in a hurry......
Can you resolve the question? I am eager to learn.......

 

[Michael 345]

Did consciousness create the universe or did the universe create consciousness?

Physics created life

Over a certain point the inputs to the brains of the Minions who evolved looked not only outward to the Universe but inwards and examined itself

This process we call concessness

 

[DaveC426913]

OK, we're back to preaching and "IMO"s. Nothing new to see here.

 

[Write4U]

OK, we're back to preaching and "IMO"s. Nothing new to see here.

Right, when there is nothing new being discussed or asked there will never be anything new to see.

I like new stuff to chew on...

 

[Write4U]

Physics created life

Over a certain point the inputs to the brains of the Minions who evolved looked not only outward to the Universe but inwards and examined itself

This process we call concessness

If with Minions you mean the three main processing centers in the brain, its close enough for jazz........

Interoception

Abstract
Converging evidence indicates that primates have a distinct cortical image of homeostatic afferent activity that reflects all aspects of the physiological condition of all tissues of the body

This interoceptive system, associated with autonomic motor control, is distinct from the exteroceptive system (cutaneous mechanoreception and proprioception) that guides somatic motor activity.

The primary interoceptive representation in the dorsal posterior insula engenders distinct highly resolved feelings from the body that include pain, temperature, itch, sensual touch, muscular and visceral sensations, vasomotor activity, hunger, thirst, and 'air hunger'. In humans, a meta-representation of the primary interoceptive activity is engendered in the right anterior insula, which seems to provide the basis for the subjective image of the material self as a feeling (sentient) entity, that is, emotional awareness.

"I am hungry, therefore I am".

 

[DaveC426913]

I like new stuff to chew on...

Have you considered science? You might like it.

 

[Write4U]

Have you considered science? You might like it.

What science? Stuff we already know and does not tell us anything new about consciousness? Or some new and fresh ideas that hold a measure of promise and offer real grist for thought?

And before you come back with a snidely, ask yourself what do we know about consciousness? A little, a lot, anything at all?

I keep asking and all I get is useless banalities, with some appreciated exceptions. And here I sit being accused of uttering banalities.
At least its new........

 

[Michael 345]

If with Minions you mean the three main processing centers in the brain, its close enough for jazz........

Never thought of Minions being brain structures - but it works

Minions = humans = mobile soft sloosie stuff with a built in ability to reproduce

Has acquired ability to note down stuff which saves following sloosie stuff the bother of doing what has already been done

Like the jazz link, ya close enough

 

[Michael 345]

Stuff we already know and does not tell us anything new about consciousness?

For me not complicated

Its the brain looking at itself

Example - audio feed back gives you a screeching noise

Brain feedback gives you more questions

 

[Write4U]

For me not complicated

Its the brain looking at itself

Example - audio feed back gives you a screeching noise.

Right, but that is produced by looping microphone and amplifier.

Brain feedback gives you more questions

The question is how does the brain look at itself? How does it produce a self-referential consciousness. How and when did it become conscious and self-aware at all?
What and where are the brain's microphones and amplifiers that "inform" us?

I've proposed a possible available answer, which Hameroff proposed from his in-depth brain research and which has prompted Penrose to come up with ORCH OR. This hypothesis is vigorously disputed, but no alternative has yet been offered, AFAIK.......

 

[Michael 345]

The question is how does the brain look at itself? How does it produce a self-referential consciousness

It's impossible for the brain NOT to be aware of itself

Feedback is the key

Problem with feedback is, colloquial speaking, overload or over thinking

 

[exchemist]

Right, but that is produced by looping microphone and amplifier. The question is how does the brain look at itself? How does it produce a self-referential consciousness. How and when did it become conscious and self-aware at all?
What and where are the brain's microphones and amplifiers that "inform" us?

I've proposed a possible available answer, which Hameroff proposed from his in-depth brain research and which has prompted Penrose to come up with ORCH OR. This hypothesis is vigorously disputed, but no alternative has yet been offered, AFAIK.......

Cite ONE paper on brain research, in-depth or otherwise, that Hameroff has authored.

 

[Write4U]

Cite ONE paper on brain research, in-depth or otherwise, that Hameroff has authored.

I can show you the places where he studied and what he studied and the books he wrote.

Dr. Stuart R. Hameroff, M.D. (Hahnemann Medical College, 1973?; B.S., Chemistry, Physics, Mathematics, University of Pittsburgh), is Emeritus Professor of Anesthesiology and Psychology and director for the Center for Consciousness Studies at the University of Arizona. He is also the lead organizer of the Science of Consciousness conference and, with Sir Roger Penrose, formulated the orchestrated objective reduction (Orch-OR) model of consciousness.

Ultimate Computing: Biomolecular Consciousness and Nanotechnology
Toward a Science of Consciousness: The First Tucson Discussions and Debates
Toward a Science of Consciousness II: The Second Tucson Discussions and Debates
Toward a Science of Consciousness III: The Third Tucson Discussions and Debates
How Consciousness Became the Universe: Quantum Physics, Cosmology, Relativity, Evolution, Neuroscience, Parallel Universes
Consciousness and the Universe: Quantum Physics, Evolution, Brain & Mind
Consciousness: Integrating Eastern and Western Perspectives
Journal of Consciousness Studies: Controversies in Science and the Humanities (Volume 1, No. 1, 1994)

From 1975 onwards, he has spent the whole of his career at the University of Arizona, becoming professor in the Department of Anesthesiology and Psychology and director for the Center for Consciousness Studies, both in 1999, and finally Emeritus professor for Anesthesiology and Psychology in 2003.

The operations of microtubules are remarkably complex and their role pervasive in cellular operations; these facts led to the speculation that computation sufficient for consciousness might somehow be occurring there. These ideas are discussed in Hameroff's first book Ultimate Computing (1987).[2]

The main substance of this book dealt with the scope for information processing in biological tissue and especially in microtubules and other parts of the cytoskeleton. Hameroff argued that these subneuronal cytoskeleton components could be the basic units of processing rather than the neurons themselves. The book was primarily concerned with information processing, with consciousness secondary at this stage.

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

Ultimate computing

Prelude,
What is this book, and why has it been written by an anesthesiologist? This book is a view of the co-evolution of consciousness and technology-past, present and future.

This book has been written by an anesthesiologist because of a confluence of two fascinations. The first is the nature of consciousness, which anesthesiologists routinely erase and restore in their patients. The second is a fifteen year trail of notions that would not go away.

While a third year medical student in 1972, I spent a summer research elective in a cancer laboratory. For some reason I became fascinated and fixated by one particular question. When cells divided, the chromosomes were separated and daughter cell architecture established by wispy strands called mitotic spindles ("microtubules") and cylindrical organelles called centrioles. Somehow, the centrioles and spindles "knew" when to move, where to go, and what to do. The uncanny guidance and orientation mechanism of these tiny biomolecular structures seemed to require some kind of motorized intelligence.

At about the same time, electron microscopy techniques were revealing the interior of all living cells to be densely filled with wispy strands, some of which were identical to mitotic spindles. Interconnected in dynamic parallel networks, these structures were thought to serve a purely supportive, or mechanical structural role and were collectively termed the "cytoskeleton."
more......

http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/content/ultimate-computing-s-hameroff

I don't know if writing a book is equivalent to writing a paper, but it's obvious he is a prolific writer and not just another flash in the pan.

 

[exchemist]

I can show you the places where he studied and what he studied and the books he wrote.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuart_Hameroff

Ultimate computing http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/content/ultimate-computing-s-hameroff

I don't know if writing a book is equivalent to writing a paper, but it's obvious he is a prolific writer and not just another flash in the pan.

That's more or less what I expected.

You claimed Hameroff did in-depth brain research. But you have no evidence he did any. So instead you come up with masses of irrelevant stuff in its place.

Any journalist can write books on a science topic that interests them, and many of them do, some of which make excellent reading. But they are not original research.

I do not believe Hameroff has done any brain research at all. All he has done, I suspect, is have some speculative ideas. That is not research, needless to say.

If Hameroff had done some original research on Orch-OR, he would have had to generate some observational data in support of his hypothesis. But he hasn't. He seems, instead, to spend his time hosting flaky conferences to which the likes of Deepak Chopra are invited.

 

[Write4U]

I do not believe Hameroff has done any brain research at all. All he has done, I suspect, is have some speculative ideas. That is not research, needless to say.

.Well, that is denegrading the thing he is actually "most" qualified in. He is an anesthesiologist, the person that renders your brain unconscious. I would assume that involves the study of the brain and exactly what part you can render unconscious without killing the patient.
That's not quite like changing the oil in your car.

I would assume that all those books contain the sum total of his knowledge. Why do you only show one book? The list shows he wrote eight books on various aspects of cell behavior.

But I'll dig further for any "college papers"

Well, here is a list of papers by Hameroff.
https://link.springer.com/search?query=stuart+Hameroff

 

[Write4U]

Some other interesting development:

I suggested the formation of a consciousness conference, and he shouted “that's a great idea!” He and I discussed Hameroff's work in microtubules as at least one of the bases for consciousness. Olson said he would contact Stu, and I would talk to Wheeler and others. I do not recall the mechanical details, but the planning was done and agenda set.

On18 August 1991, the Towards a Science of Consciousness conference series was born. Known then as “The Fantastic Conscious Mind Conference” the original auspicious assemblage at the Sierra Vista, Ramada Inn Ballroom that day had great hopes that there would be future conferences to bring together the world’s experts in consciousness to answer Olson's question. Olson, true to his dictum “Think Positive”, as reflected on his fliers advertising this “pre-conference”, had his dreams at least partially fulfilled.

https://www.academia.edu/Documents/in/Stuart_Hameroff

 

[origin]

Please shut up.