Quantum Theory

[regnauld]

---

agree. consciousness for now is not empirically demonstrable nor can me quantitatively formulated. but then again, Cognitive Science as a discipline is a very young science, but the optimistic view is that it can become a science like physics in the next 100 years. thus, although current literature consciousness could not be explained in reductive physicalism (pure materialist conception) exactly why the problem of consciousness is the very argument against the forefront of physicalist theories of the mind, i am stilll open to the idea, and even wager, that in the future consciousness can be explained in scientific terms. Such was why i said "perhaps" in my earlier statement with the condition that we could adequately define consciousness and demonstrate the certain shade of consciousness we consider.

cheers!

Watch this the CHILD about quantum mechanics on PURE POTENTIALITY!

YouTube - What the bleep do we know? Down the rabbit hole. part 3

[The_Child]

Watch this the CHILD about quantum mechanics on PURE POTENTIALITY!

YouTube - What the bleep do we know? Down the rabbit hole. part 3

ok sir, so whats the connection?

[regnauld]

ok sir, so whats the connection?

Well, it talks about Consciousness at sub atomic level!

[The_Child]

yeh apparently, they lost me there, when that guy started to mention consciousness.

possibilities - agree.
strange world - agree.
what we perceive here is not what it seems in the quantum level - agree
indeterminacy - agree.

but i dont quite understand what consciousness has go to do with it.

[regnauld]

QUANTUM PHYSICS: NON CONVENTIONAL THEORIES FOR THE POSSIBLE NATURE OF MIND/CONSCIOUSNESS

Stuart Hameroff, an anaesthetist at the University of Arizona, and Roger Penrose, a mathematician from the University of Cambridge, have raised many of the limitations of the theories above. In particular they argue that they cannot fully explain the observed features of consciousness.
The quantum processes theory put forward by Hameroff and Penrose is based upon the principle that there are two levels of explanation in physics: the familiar classical level used to describe large-scale objects and the quantum level used to describe very small events at the subatomic level.
At the quantum level superimposed states are possible, that is, two possibilities may exist for any event at the same time, but at the classical level either one or the other must exist. Hameroff and Penrose propose that consciousness arises from tiny tube-like structures made of proteins that exist in all the cells in the body, including brain cells, and act as a skeleton that allows cells to keep their shape. They propose that these small structures are the site of quantum processes in the brain, due to their structure and shape. They argue that consciousness is thus not a product of direct brain cell to brain cell activity, but rather the action of subatomic processes occurring in the brain.


Horizon : Quantum Physics

[The_Child]

QUANTUM PHYSICS: NON CONVENTIONAL THEORIES FOR THE POSSIBLE NATURE OF MIND/CONSCIOUSNESS

Stuart Hameroff, an anaesthetist at the University of Arizona, and Roger Penrose, a mathematician from the University of Cambridge, have raised many of the limitations of the theories above. In particular they argue that they cannot fully explain the observed features of consciousness.
The quantum processes theory put forward by Hameroff and Penrose is based upon the principle that there are two levels of explanation in physics: the familiar classical level used to describe large-scale objects and the quantum level used to describe very small events at the subatomic level.
At the quantum level superimposed states are possible, that is, two possibilities may exist for any event at the same time, but at the classical level either one or the other must exist. Hameroff and Penrose propose that consciousness arises from tiny tube-like structures made of proteins that exist in all the cells in the body, including brain cells, and act as a skeleton that allows cells to keep their shape. They propose that these small structures are the site of quantum processes in the brain, due to their structure and shape. They argue that consciousness is thus not a product of direct brain cell to brain cell activity, but rather the action of subatomic processes occurring in the brain.


Horizon : Quantum Physics

yes ive heard of that, exactly why i once argued that if consciousness could be considered as a quanta, not that quanta is consciousness but consciousness is made of quanta, then it would lend a scientific certainty to the idea of freewill and morality. remember that morality only stands on the postulate that there is freedom ergo, indeterminacy (without freedom, there is no sense of doing what is good because we have no choice in the first place) if we could prove that such is so, then we could arrive at a certainty that human action cannot be determined.

problem, we could not prove that because we have first to determine what consciousness really is. Could Computer achieve consciousness? Does a vegetative person have Consciousness? Could there be consciousness outside a receptacle like the brain or other similar things such as computers?

again, as ive been mentioning, the discipline of Cognitive Science is a very young science. It is interdisciplinary, and what we have in that regard, in that quote you gave is merely speculative. It does not have a demonstrable proof, nor a rational proof. at best, its an educated guess, a hypothesis.

[regnauld]

My concept of GOD as consciousness is found in the MICROCOSM (Sub Atomic) as well as in the MACROCOSM (universe)

[kebot]

OK this is not Spiritual I guess. I guess quantum theory can be broke down as the composition of matter...

Break this down:
molecule->atom->proton/electron->quarks->string
(hope im right based on what i remember)

for those who don't have an idea String Theory will make you understand this... I watched the video. In late 90's they say quarks is the small god's that makes up the universe but then quarks ddnt prove to be the basic component of matter. So scientist again make a new theory call strings. But so far in the documentary they said it is impossible to study strings based on the current technology.

So its safe to say this is scientific Findings not related to God. If someone insist then please present a convincing facts and proof that we might be able to respect your views not just personal view because it becomes a subjective matter.

Science is truth.
Theory is Unproven Science.
Theory is Unproven Truth.

Logical?


FYI:
The old quantum theory was a collection of results from the years 1900–1925 which predate modern quantum mechanics.

Quantum theory is already proven so its called Quantum Mechanics.

[schmuck]

^ diba lahi man ang string theory og quantum theory?

[vanschen]

^ diba lahi man ang string theory og quantum theory?

Quantum theory is incorporated in String Theory. it unifies both QM and GTR.