Author of the Month :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
Join us at this forum every month for a discussion with famous popular authors from around the world. 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Sirius7237 wrote:

> Okay, I had a chance to read over this paper a couple of times
> and try to make sense of it.
>
> At first, I read over the abstract and tried to get a handle.
> My first thought was that this guy is a genius or deranged or
> maybe a combination of both - it really is truly hard to get a
> handle on what he is talking about:

A physicist once said that when it comes to this stuff, it's not whether it's crazy but whether it's crazy enough!

>
> Abstract
>
> "Current quantum theories of consciousness suggest a
> configuration space of an entangled ensemble state as global
> work space for conscious experience. This study will describe a
> procedure for adjustment of the singlet evolution of a quantum
> computation to a classical signal input by action potentials.
> The computational output of an entangled state in a single
> neuron will be selected in a network environment by "survival
> of the fittest" coupling with other neurons. Darwinian
> evolution of this coupling will result in a binding of action
> potentials to a convoluted orbit of phase-locked oscillations
> with harmonic, m-adic, or fractal periodicity. Progressive
> integration of signal inputs will evolve a present memory space
> independent from the history of construction. Implications for
> mental processes, e.g., associative memory, creativity, and
> consciousness will be discussed. A model for generation of
> quantum coherence in a single neuron will be suggested."
>
> Once I got a little further into the paper and read it over a
> couple of times it became clear that he was speaking in a
> language that, as a student of biochemistry, is clearly
> well-informed, scientifically derived and terminologically
> accurate even if it is not well articulated to the point of
> being almost unintelligible to the average reader.
>
> So, all that being said, this is more of a thought experiment
> than an actual physical experiment that could prove neurons can
> be stimulated by being uncoupled and at a distance - which is
> what I was interested in . But, at far as I can tell, it does
> have interesting implications for the origin of consciousness
> in the entangled state of a single neuron and the relation of
> that neuron with the whole neural infrastructure.

I wonder if an actual physical experiment could even be done--it may be a question of the right technology and equipment being available.
>
> An interesting thought hit me while I was reading.....
>
> A single cell can survive in nature on it's own such as an
> amoeba or paramecium yet a single cell within our bodies is one
> of billions and billions of cells that work together towards
> the survival of the organism as a whole. If one accepts that
> each cell is an entity unto itself, enabled with a form of life
> and a desire to metabolize and reproduce, yet still is
> genetically predisposed to function towards the benefit of the
> organism as a whole, how aware is each single cell of it's own
> place in a Universe of billions and billions of cells on the
> scale of an organism?

I've thought about this and I've got nothing. That is one deep question.

Mitochondria would be a perfect example of this. All the evidence points to the mitochondria being an invading or captured entity now in an endosymbiotic relationship with the host cell. We couldn't live two minutes without them now, and yet they were once an independent life form on their own.

When we die, our composite cells die, too, and break down into their constituent atoms and molecules, whether they're brain cells, skin cells, blood cells, etc. They then flit off to become part of something else. Take the "bio" out of it, and it really is just plain chemistry.

Maybe we should all take a moment and say thank you to all the hundreds of millions of cells we have. Without them, the larger organism couldn't function and wouldn't even exist.

> Okay, my brain hurts - alot.

Yeah, mine too.
>
> Good paper though - and I think it is relevant to the topic
> though I'm not smart enough to figure out how, lol.
>
> . I'll read again tomorrow and see if I can glean any more
> relevance for the topic we have been discussing. In the
> meantime.......

There are some things some of us aren't wired to understand. I think this is one of them LOL



In the spring, at the end of the day, you should smell like earth. ~ Margaret Atwood

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 267 drrayeye 14-Nov-13 15:59
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 164 brucenyc1 14-Nov-13 17:13
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 133 drrayeye 14-Nov-13 17:26
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 175 brucenyc1 14-Nov-13 18:58
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 139 drrayeye 14-Nov-13 21:11
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 163 Aine 14-Nov-13 19:45
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 178 drrayeye 14-Nov-13 21:25
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 182 Aine 15-Nov-13 13:43
Science vs. wissenschaft 253 drrayeye 16-Nov-13 08:15
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 127 Eddie Larry 15-Nov-13 03:06
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 104 drrayeye 15-Nov-13 06:34
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 149 Eddie Larry 16-Nov-13 00:22
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 180 Titus Livius 16-Nov-13 18:02
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 153 drrayeye 17-Nov-13 01:06
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 147 eyeofhorus33 16-Nov-13 18:34
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 153 drrayeye 17-Nov-13 01:11
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 129 cladking 17-Nov-13 03:11
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 180 Sirius7237 18-Nov-13 04:26
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 198 Don Carroll 18-Nov-13 20:11
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 134 Sirius7237 18-Nov-13 22:34
Separated electron pairs remain "connected" with respect to opposite polarity 205 Dr. Lew Graham 19-Nov-13 03:44
Re: Separated electron pairs remain "connected" with respect to opposite polarity 122 Sirius7237 19-Nov-13 07:52
Re: Separated electron pairs remain "connected" with respect to opposite polarity 157 Aine 19-Nov-13 13:54
Re: Separated electron pairs remain "connected" with respect to opposite polarity 171 carolb 19-Nov-13 14:17
Re: Separated electron pairs remain "connected" with respect to opposite polarity 197 Aine 19-Nov-13 14:48
Re: Separated electron pairs remain "connected" with respect to opposite polarity 174 JonnyMcA 19-Nov-13 15:11
Re: Separated electron pairs remain "connected" with respect to opposite polarity 169 Sirius7237 19-Nov-13 16:54
Re: Separated electron pairs remain "connected" with respect to opposite polarity 136 Aine 19-Nov-13 17:37
Quantum evolution of entangled particles in neural nets and consciousness! 118 Sirius7237 20-Nov-13 03:15
Re: Quantum evolution of entangled particles in neural nets and consciousness! 178 Aine 20-Nov-13 18:28
Re: Quantum evolution of entangled particles in neural nets and consciousness! 160 Don Carroll 20-Nov-13 21:25
Re: Quantum evolution of entangled particles in neural nets and consciousness! 156 Sirfiroth 21-Nov-13 00:58
Re: Quantum evolution of entangled particles in neural nets and consciousness! 176 Don Carroll 22-Nov-13 22:33
Re: Quantum evolution of entangled particles in neural nets and consciousness! 183 cladking 23-Nov-13 01:11
Re: Quantum evolution of entangled particles in neural nets and consciousness! 148 Don Carroll 23-Nov-13 01:46
Re: Quantum evolution of entangled particles in neural nets and consciousness! 109 Sirius7237 21-Nov-13 18:50
Re: Quantum evolution of entangled particles in neural nets and consciousness! 233 Don Carroll 23-Nov-13 00:15
Re: Quantum evolution of entangled particles in neural nets and consciousness! 194 Sirius7237 21-Nov-13 05:48
Re: Quantum evolution of entangled particles in neural nets and consciousness! 164 Aine 22-Nov-13 14:20
Re: Quantum evolution of entangled particles in neural nets and consciousness! 163 Sirius7237 22-Nov-13 18:56
Re: Quantum evolution of entangled particles in neural nets and consciousness! 161 Aine 03-Dec-13 14:15
Great Australian News Link! 162 Dr. Lew Graham 04-Dec-13 07:03
Re: Great Australian News Link! 146 Aine 04-Dec-13 12:38
Re: Great Australian News Link! 124 Sirius7237 04-Dec-13 20:45
Re: Great Australian News Link! 159 Aine 05-Dec-13 12:45
Re: Great Australian News Link! 152 Sirius7237 05-Dec-13 17:53
Re: Great Australian News Link! 159 Aine 06-Dec-13 15:12
A "Mechanism"? 186 Dr. Lew Graham 04-Dec-13 22:01
Re: A "Mechanism"? 158 Aine 05-Dec-13 12:46
Re: Separated electron pairs remain "connected" with respect to opposite polarity 157 D-Archer 24-Nov-13 10:49
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 169 D-Archer 24-Nov-13 10:44
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 173 Eddie Larry 24-Nov-13 15:03
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 132 cladking 24-Nov-13 16:13
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 175 laughin 08-Dec-13 16:34
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 143 David Campbell 09-Dec-13 22:15
Re: Can one be both a scientist and a spiritualist? 145 cladking 10-Dec-13 03:21


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.