"Brain really uses quantum effects" (Sabine Hossenfelder)

[C C]

PRESS RELEASE: https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1042789

PAPER: https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jpcb.3c07936

VIDEO EXCERPTS: This is news that I certainly didn’t see coming. Do you remember Roger Penrose’s idea that the human brain uses quantum effects in microtubules, and that those are the origin of consciousness? Yeah, that sounds pretty crazy. But well, it seems that he was right. At least about the microtubules.

[...] I’ve heard more than one person say that what a pity that Penrose fell for this crazy Hameroff person. But, well, I’ve met both Penrose and Hameroff, and they’re both crazy of course, but neither of them is stupid. So what are we to make of this microtubule business?

Now comes this new paper from a group that doesn’t seem to have anything to do with either Penrose or Hameroff, and they say that they have clear evidence that these microtubules actually do display real quantum effects. More specifically, it’s a process called superradiance. It basically requires the molecules to have quantum links to each other to achieve a larger emission of light...

[...] Another interesting part of the paper is that they say that the quantum effects in these microtubules can do something else, which is that they become much more efficient at absorbing ultraviolet light and redistributing it to lower energies. That is, they basically protect cells from the potential harm of ultraviolet light. In the press release, the researchers say if these quantum effects fail, that might play a role for degenerative brain diseases. I’m somewhat sceptical about this, but then this isn’t my research area.

What does any of this have to do with consciousness? Nothing really...

Brain really uses quantum effects ... https://youtu.be/R6G1D2UQ3gg

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/R6G1D2UQ3gg

[Magical Realist]

More specifically, it’s a process called superradiance. It basically requires the molecules to have quantum links to each other to achieve a larger emission of light...

I just knew it! Consciousness is made of light! We are the ultravisible cumulative radiance of trillions of scintillating quantum level emissions! lol

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1176695

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21425483/

[stryder]

More specifically, it’s a process called superradiance. It basically requires the molecules to have quantum links to each other to achieve a larger emission of light...

I just knew it! Consciousness is made of light! We are the ultravisible cumulative radiance of trillions of scintillating quantum level emissions! lol

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1176695

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21425483/

I wouldn't suggest consciousness was made of light... Anything involving evolution usually implies trying to have redundancies in place, so consciousness is likely more analogue.

[Magical Realist]

I'm being somewhat tongue-in-cheek. It's just a wishful speculation that would suit my spiritualist leanings. You can't really destroy light as far as I know. It just keeps going on and on in its own timeless forever. Imagine being an ever widening rainbow eidolon in outer space!

https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/...e-forever/

[stryder]

I'm being somewhat tongue-in-cheek. It's just a wishful speculation that would suit my spiritualist leanings. You can't really destroy light as far as I know. It just keeps going on and on in its own timeless forever. Imagine being an ever widening rainbow eidolon in outer space!

https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/...e-forever/

I get that MR, I wasn't trying to criticise but just throw an alternative perspective in, as when it comes to theory it's good to try to understand from other perspectives. (It gives a chance to try to weigh up what fits)

For instance an observation and possible thought is -
if the universe was infinite and there was infinite stars, and light was timeless and went on for ever... we would never see space as being dark or devoid of light (we probably wouldn't be able to distinguish stars from one another as it would just be a light background.)

Don't get me wrong there is a cosmological background, however it's distortions are definitely linked to it's analogous nature.