quantum brain

8/2/2019 Quantum Brain

1/12

I have thus far considered mainly classical mechanical(macroscientific) paradigms for the relationship of the mind to the brainon the widely accepted premise that awareness and subjectivity areprobably networkeffects, involving many millions of neurons in thalamicand cortical structures31neurons not quantum collapses, not

holographic waves, and not translations of particle effects into neuraleffects. Yet the mind is not related to the brain in a simple topographicmanner, as we have seen, nor are there answers for fundamentalquestions about basic phenomenasuch as the role of back projections,the nature of representation in sensory systems, whether sensorysystems are hierarchically organized, precisely how memory is storedand retrieved, how sensorimotor integration works, [and] what sleep anddreaming are all about32the bioneurological mechanisms ofawareness.33 Insofar as the evolution of consciousness may have littleto do with differentiating biological regimes under Darwinian naturalselection or other changing external circumstances and arise, rather,

because of the natural dynamics of self-organizing processes,34

it isworth considering whether consciousness is related in some fashion toquantum-level phenomena.

I should point out right away that there is no demonstrable linkbetween the ranges in which neuronal or subneuronal events occur andquantum ones nor any explanation for how the two realms, existing atradically different degrees of scale with radically different ranges ofactivity, could interact in such a way as to co-create consciousness.After all, quantum effects occur only in very small spaces and at verylow temperatures or under very high pressures, notwithstanding (ofcourse) that these spaces in some manner comprise the core reality of

all larger spaces like neurons, brains, and their components. {questionfor readers: what is the scale of difference between the quantum realmand the neuronal realm? A million, a billion..?}

For reasons that I will soon explain, the quantum brain is not a keypremise in my book, though it is a proposition I need to identify in myjourney toward something else. As I am not a physicist (I never evencompleted my college physics course), I will be speaking of things I dontreally know or understand. My account is necessarily a blend of popphysics, intellectual hearsay and gossip, and online iterations ofcommon metaphors, narratives, and themes.

First and foremost, the so-called quantum brain is an inevitable

trope of the reflection that quantum-level phenomena andconsciousness, being equally mysterious, equally inexplicable, andequally indeterminate, are causally interrelated at a deep operationallevel of the universe. As early as 1951 quantum physicist David Bohmpointed to the uncanny resemblance between subjective experience andthe qualities and properties of quantum systems. Quantumindeterminacy at least seems to have to do with free will and theimaginative aspects of consciousness in a way that the biology of the


2/12

nervous system doesntperhaps not its outlying provinces whereneuroscience still holds sway but at its still inaccessible base. At leastmetaphorically the mind follows paradoxical principles resembling thoseof quantum mechanics; for instance, consciousness like particles can bein two places at once or connect to things without connect or operate

symbolically outside the domain of time.Speculative physics and astrophysics are awash in propositions atprecisely the point at which reality hits its own absolute boundaries:dark matter, event horizons, tiny stringlike forms; a fictive early universein which the dimension of time is mathematically distorted into one ofspace so that all four dimensions function like space; another wholeuniverse in a superposition of many different states, in which theconstants of nature like quark masses take different values and inwhich even a cat can be in a superposition of states, in some of which itis alive and in others dead; eleven space-time dimensions withdifferent sets of particles or strings or membranes in spacetimes of

various dfferent dimensionalities; quantum particles entangled suchthat, if they were dice, each pair would give the same roll light yearsapart in time or space; or a universe [that] does not have just a singlehistory but every possible history.*35

The stuff of poetry, abstract mathematics, music, and hiphopcontains intrinsic mysteries like uncertainty states and wave functions,though that does not mean that they represent the same mystery. Thequantum event-field was modeled in the 1920s to deal with Newtonianmechanics failure to account for the realm of the very, very small, notfor its failure to account for consciousness. It has a very limited exactapplication in nature. For instance, quantum mechanics will give perfect

answers for the energy states of the hydrogen atom, and for any otherone electron, one nucleus system. As soon as scientists go to a morethan two-body system, quantum mechanics can't give them an exactanswer and they have to start tossing fudge factors into their equationsto get their numbers to match known energy values. Even the simplehelium atom (one nucleus, two electrons) is beyond exact solution.Physicists have been trying for years to mathematically understand justthe combining of two hydrogen atoms to form a hydrogen moleculeatwo-electron chemical bond and a four-body problem (two electrons andtwo protons) when even a three-body problem is unsolvable. How thencan it begin to account for epiphenomenal thought events?

With these provisos many neuroscientifically-orientedphilosophers, psychologists, and even some theoretical physicists havereconceived the brain as a microphysical object and mapped mind onto

*The cat belongs to early twentieth-century physicist Erwin Schrdinger,the dice to twenty-first-century quantum-information physicist MichaelA. Nielsen, the universe with every possible history to astrophysicistStephen Hawking.


3/12

it by deepening its field and substituting, as it were another brain orcerebral level: the quantum-mechanical field of relationships in neuraltissue. Potentiated functions of this brain can then hypothetically bederived from quantum field theorys precepts ofwave-form,superposition, quasicrystals, quantum gravity, nondeterminism,

nonlocality, nonalgorithmic computations, quantum entanglement, andthe like.Parallel computational capacity is assumed to woven into and

intrinsic to the fabric of matter at a subatomic level, compressed intocellular density of the brain, hence concomitant with the creation ofreality itself, consciousness generated as its invariable outcome. Thetrillions of particle reactions, quantum properties, and density matricesimbedded in the brain cause indeterminate states to be propagatedthrough the collective neuronal flow into the cortex by the interactionsof individual microfilaments and computer-like structures such asmicrotubules and other organelles making up neurons.

Even as faster computers operate by quantum tunneling,teleporting information between different energy states, so mightquantum tunneling take place between neurons or between theirmicrotubules or even among their bosons and other subatomic particles.It might occur at several levels simultaneously, approximating theinterior feel of consciousness. Some sort of virtual machine would beoperated by the brain or assignable through the to the quantum statesof particles in the atoms inside its molecules. The interfacing deep fields(neurological and nuclear) would excite a combinationamplification/synergy that triggers topological phase transitionsbetween separate state universes. As neural networks and subcellular

networks reverberate back and forth, consciousness would be generatedas an emergent phenomenon.

Bosons exist at the borderline of the real and an abstractmathematical realm and by definition are not ordinary, concrete objects,even small ones. They obey statistical rules such that any number ofthem can occupy identical places and share quantum states. Carriers offorce rather than matter, they have zero or integral spin: e.g. noequivalent to angular momentum in quantum space. Basicallymassless, they transform nonlinearly in the context of superconductivity.They are also scalar; that is, have magnitude but no direction and are

not changed by coordinate system rotations or by Lorentztransformationsby conversion into each other through differentobservational frames of references or space-time relativistic exchanges.In that sense the scalar properties of bosons might be independent ofeven their own independence; remember, these are quantum effectsrather than objects or energies. What such independence might amountto is anyones guess, but we are talking about the stream of mindednessand its possible sources in nature.


4/12

In the 1960s physicist Hiroomi Umezawa modeled quanta of long-range coherent waves within and between brain cells, with memorystorage and retrieval in terms of bosons. His theory was laterelaborated into quantum brain dynamics wherein water molecules(comprising seventy percent of the brain) constitute a quantum cortical

field. The quanta in this field (dubbed corticons) interact withbiomolecules generated in its component neurons and propagated alongtheir synaptic network, compacting in a state known as the Bosecondensate, which allows long-range correlation among the dipoles. Asbiomolecules line up along the actin filaments of the cytoskeleton, theygenerate dipolar oscillations in the form of quantum coherent waves.Consciousness and sense of self are then engendered by interactionsbetween energy quanta of the cortical field and biomolecular wavesoriginating from the neuronal network, particularly the dendrites, theirquantum states producing two complementary representations, one ofself and the other of the external world. Consciousness becomes the

recognition by each representation of the existence of the other.

In the 1980s mathematical physicist Roger Penrose, dismissing acomputer model for consciousness as inadequate, proposed anonalgorithmic computing process in the braina function notreducibleto algorithms, hence non-computable. Noncomputable means thatthe performance of the system could not be produced by anyalgorithmic procedure; more to the point, it could not be approximatedby an algorithmic procedure;36 for instance river eddies and planetaryrings, complex systems in continuous states, are only weaklynonalgorithmic. Penrose cites the reasoning used to create

mathematical systems as one example of a strong nonalgorithmicconstraint. He then aligns this abstract function with the nuclearnoncomputable function based on the random choice of position thatfollows the collapse of a quantum wave into a particle underhypothetical conditions of quantum gravity. He later refined thiswaveform into a second, autonomous kind of collapse where multiplequanta, each with its own tag of spacetime curvature, become unstablewhen separated by a Planck length of more than 10-35 meters andtherefore collapse on their own accord without interaction with theenvironment. He called this collapse objective reduction and, throughits mechanism, linked the brain directly to spacetime geometry,37

though he could not assign the event to any neuronal anatomy.After reading Penroses book, research physician Stuart Hameroff

decided to fill this gap with the possible computing functions ofmicrotubules and other subneuronal components of the cytoskeletons ofbrain cells.38 The main supporting structures of the cytoskeleton,microtubules seem to have properties which make certain quantum-mechanical phenomena (e.g. super-radiance) possible and they play akey role in neuronal functioning.39 Microtubules have pore diameters of


5/12

14 nanometers and are composed of tubulin protein dimer subunits,each with hydrophobic pockets 8 nm. apart, perhaps containingdelocalized pi electrons. Smaller nonpolar regions incorporate indolerings themselves rich in pi electrons, separated by an even more minute2 nm., close enough, Hameroff believed, to become quantum entangled

to jump the Newtonian barrier into quantum space. Becoming lockedin phase and using bosons to form a Bose-Einstein condensate, theiroutput might extend over the synaptic gap junctions between neurons,translating quantum activity to a macroscopic portion of the brain.

As waves collapse into particles, non-computable [should it benon-copmputational?] influences flood consciousness into the brain fromthe fundamental geometry of spacetime, leading to gamma-wavesynchronization, which is also a correlate of consciousness inconventional neuroscience models. Hameroff called his enhanced modelorchestrated objective reduction, and he and Penrose subsequentlycollaborated on developing it as an intracellular model of

consciousness.40

I am a synthesizer here, as I get these images from the pop usesof quantum language across the Internetattributions that havedeveloped their own implied meaning set. Yet Im not sure that evenPenrose and Hameroff can push it further, though ostensibly (unlike me)they know precisely what they are trying to push.

Neuroscientific researchers did not take any of thisadventuresome modeling seriously for a whole range of reasons: thelack of mechanisms whereby microtubule effects could be translatedinto neuronal effects and conveyed then from one neuron to another,

e.g. encodeinformation derived from sensory structures, process it,and then modify the firing of neurons in such a way as to support theconsciousness of the stimulus, and perhaps a purposeful response aswell;41 the lack of mechanisms whereby quantum events could betransmitted even from one tubule to another;42 the lack of mechanismsto deter macro-transmitter molecules from inhibiting the spread ofquantum coherence;43 the impossibility of biological tissue surviving thehigh temperatures, energy, and degree of hydrolysis required forquantum interactions (protoplasm and quantum entanglement donthappily share a bedroom); and the lack of experimental evidence thatquantum coherence even involves super-radiance in microtubules.44

Neurons are classical mechanical objects and they yield toordinary not quantum deconstruction. Plus, how can microtubules bothconduct and be isolated from the neurotransmitters andneuromodulators that they use to carry sensory signals, yet permeabilityand impermeability to the same ions is necessary to fulfill both quantumand neural conditions? How is the microtubule supposed tocommunicate with the synapses to have the Penrose effect? Whatprecisely is supposed to be the effect on the neuronal membrane and


6/12

how is it to be achieved?... The release of neurotransmitter vesicles, forexample, do not have any characteristic association with microtubules,so far as is known.45 When the quantum realm is coupled irreversiblywith the macroframe, the possible consequence of decoherence defyeven common sense and result in mixed metaphors and counterintuitive

propositionsplus why would quantum states not decohere long beforebefore they even reached a spatial or temporal scale applicable toneural processing?

Yet if your view is that consciousness is neurons, neurons, andmore neurons and the answer has got to be in there somewherebecause it cant be anywhere else (without invoking idealism, vitalism,Platonism, or slapping on some metaphorical conflation), then thestretching of quantum events across a billionfold divide from a nano to amacro level is the only habitable platform between the abyss ofpremature concreteness of the unknown and the opposite abyss ofknee-jerk intelligent design.

Tell me that all that music (Bachs organs, the didgeridoos,ragtime, Bob Marley and the Wailers, Lady Radnors Suite, SteveRoachs Structures From Silence) isnt coming from somewhere.

From here the models only get more sci-fi, as logically possibleworlds projected into tangibly realized space quickly developmetaphysical characteristics. Physicist Henry Stapp translated objectivecollapse theory into his own free-will-oriented choice menu for the brain.The cerebral wave function and the particles indeterministic collapseare considered ontologically distinct features, quantum events that arepart of a holistic process for selection from sets of possibilities among

neural excitations in an evolving universe, something like Whiteheadsincursion of novelty. A memory-oriented code reading neuronalsynapses and drawing on the brains memory of past event creates thequantum future in a sphere that cannot be represented outside itselfand is not subject to the laws of classical mechanics in the way that therest of the universe is. This approach translates quantum-versus-classical mechanics into mind-versus-matter dualism.

Stapp adds, The conscious action is represented physically by theselection of a new top-level code, which then automatically exercisestop-level control of the flow of neural excitations in the brain through theaction of quantum-theoretic laws of nature. The unity of conscious

thought comes from the unifying integrative character of the consciouscreative act, which selects a single code from among the multitudegenerated by the causal development prescribed by quantum theory.46

Once we are in deep quantum-metaphor territory, the variations ofare endless. David Chalmers offers his own most promisinginterpretation [which] allows conscious states to be correlated with thetotal quantum state of a system, with the extra constraint that consciousstates (unlike physical states) can never be superposed. In a conscious


7/12

physical system such as a brain the physical and phenomenal states ofthe system will be correlated in a (nonsuperposed) quantum state.Upon observation.the superposed external system [would]becomecorrelated with the brain, yielding a resulting superposition of brainstates and so (by psychophysical correlation) a superposition of

conscious states. But such a superposition cannot occur, so one of thepotential resulting conscious states is somehow selected (presumably bya nondeterministic dynamic principle at the phenomenal level). Theresult is that (by psychophysical correlation) a definite brain state and adefinite state of the observed object are also selected.47

Istvn Dienes, another contemporary model-maker, posits thefollowing under his rubric of the Consciousness Holomatrix:

A thought for the brain is like a neutrino for the universe. It iseverywhere and nowhere. We can in principle localise an electron inthe brain but we cannot, even in principle, localise a thought..Through quantum activity in the brain, a nonlocal knot is generateda

defect on the field line which characterizes it as a wholea spatiallyextended object. This then creates its own internal principle ofunfolding. Dienes invites the angel of topology to save his appearances:

Nature obeys mathematical laws, but while for the physical brainthese laws are primarily geometrical, both incommutative andnoncommutative spaces, for the cognitive brain the underylingmathematical theory is essentially and fundamentally topological.[C]onsciousness is a topological effect. The brain decides geometrically;the mind decides topologically. A (topo)logical exciton emerges as afundamental quantum of consciousness, forming coherent waves thatrun through the brain matter. In this way topology is not a matter of

choice butfundamental. A (topo)logical process propagating along aclosed information loop (knot) manifests itself as the thoughtprocess.48

Additionally, topological energy and interaction are notcircumscribed by finite speed of propagations of interactions.Topological properties are tachyonic and could propagateinstantly.49 Manifesting anywhere, they join any place to any otherplace. In such an imaginal regime nature could be viewed asintegrative, emergent, self-organizing, non-isotropic (anisotropic), andquantum coherent to the corefar weirder than Source Code orJabberwocky.

But Dienes take it even further: [In] a two-dimensional stripuniverse with both ends extended to an absolutely remote areaifsomeone at infinity twisted and glued the ends of the strip the entireuniverse would instantly change from orientable to nonorientable,reversing the chirality (mirror-image superimposability) of anythingpassing through it. The topo-brain might likewise involve such Moebius-strip-like transpositions. So then to describe consciousness one doesntreally need space-time or, more radically, does not have spacetime


8/12

anymore, but just a tensor [multidimensional vector-array] product oftwo-dimensional topologies, much as with string theoryone does nothave a classical spacetime but only the corresponding two-dimensionaltheory describing the propagation of strings. Worldines are replaced byworldsheets, the interaction vertices in the Feynman diagrams

[momentum-conserving eigenstates of particles colliding with anti-particles] are smoothed out, and spacetime exists only to the extentthat it can be extracted from that two-dimensional field that encodesinformation [the Holomatrix].50

As long as weve gotten that far, I would suggest that large andsmall themselves may be conceptually relative insofar as theuniverse, originating in a very small (subatomic) space, then explodingand expanding to create the largest known space, could be conceived inits entirety as a quantum event in a pocket of something else, perhapssomething equally quantum. Ordinary Newtonian space would thenrepresent the outside of that expansion whereas consciousness as well

as the interpolation of quantum effects into matter would represent itsinside. Like the speed of light these quantum effects would beindependent of velocity relationships, reference frames, distances,elapsed times, and orderings of events. Mind then becomes aspontaneous fluctuation of the pockets quantum vacuumcogito ergosum and the same electron that is part of the soil and then a sesameseed would end up generating poetry upon passing into the brain. Thisis a multiverse distributed through its own complex self-computinglattice of logically supported operations.

The world is then the summation of all that is accessible from ametaphysical index. Our "mind" is a particular way that a receiver-

transmitter works at that instant, and as that kind of thing. Ontologycovers theories of various natural kinds. Natural kinds occur due to theways of trying to know about them. Indexation qua mind has epistemicqualities, as it coalesces as a process manifesting itself (trajectories)through further metaphysical indices, counterfactual logic, andconditional logics, always sending a sign-signal that this, and this, andthen this is some part of the structure of the plethora, of which not allparts can be "known".

Minds somehow belong to spacetime indices that allow those"minds" to function as they do. The "story" we live is the runningthrough indexes, over "time," composing physicality, mental histories,

narratives, stories.Then we make our macro-cosmic being "fit" with the fractal scales

at a cosmic level, and cosmic scales at sub-nano levels. Reality loopsinto and out of itself as it knows itself, creating its sense of self,according to the "rules," motifs, and dynamics of the operational natureof reality here-now.

In fact, here-now means nothing, as it is just an indexicalstatement into my "perspective, the maximal sum of seen-thought-


9/12

intuited-felt-dreamed being.51

I think that all these lines of modeling are important, not becausethey are correct but because they offload consciousness onto systemsthat conceptually bears its weight and establish a parallel between two

ranges of the universe, even if it is not the right parallel. Discoveringwhether any of them are actually valid is impossible anyway.Given the types of applicable technological breakthroughs that

have been made in digital memory, nanotechnology, crystal structure,and genome mapping, I find it at least conceivable that the quantumbrain could lead somewhere relevant. Even so, its complex object orcontinuum of objects and emergent field effects does not openmeaningfully differentontological territory from the materialists purelybehavioral and mechanical brain. It doesnt rescue qualia or banishzombies; it merely runs them anew at a nano-level. The stream ofconsciousness remains a hallucination, albeit a quantum illusiona

movie of quantized inputs from both internal and external sources setin a continuous cognitive stream. Consciousness remains anepiphenomenon, albeit holding a scrap of defensible turf in a Darwinianuniverse. It still cannot survive its own illusory basis or provide actualmeaning or morality though, as a quantum event, it fulfills Whiteheadsprerequisite of novelty and increase the subtlety factor in creation.

Chalmers concludes similarly that, after all the fuss, quantumtheories of consciousness suffer from the same difficulties as neural orcomputational theories. Quantum phenomena have some remarkablefunctional properties, such as nondeterminism and nonlocaltiy. It isnatural to speculate that these properties may play some role in the

explanation of cognitive functions such as random choice and theintegration of information, and this hypothesis cannot be ruled out apriori. But when it comes to the explanation of experience, quantumprocesses are in the same boat as any other. The question of why theseproperties give rise to experience is unanswered.52

Rick Grush and Patricia Smith Churchland, staunchly materialisticphiliosophers, pose the larger matter elegantly while going for itsjugular:

Despite the rather breathtaking flimsiness of the consciousness-quantum connection, the idea has enjoyed a surprisingly warmreception, at least outside neuroscience. One cannot help groping about

for some explanation for this rather odd fact. Is it not even morereductionist than explaining consciousness in terms of the properties ofnetworks of neurons? Emotionally, it seems, the two reductioniststrategies arouse quite different feelings. After some interviewing, in anadmittedly haphazard fashion, we found the following story gatheringcredence.

Some people who, intellectually, are materialists neverthelesshave strong dualist hankeringsespecially hankerings about life after


10/12

death. They have a negative gut reaction to the idea that neuronscells that you can see under a microscope and probe with electrodes,brains that you can hold in one hand and that rapidly rot without oxygensupplyare the source of subjectivity and the me-ness of me. Thecrucial feature of neurons that makes them capable of processing and

storing information is just ions passing back and forth across neuronalmembranes through proteing channels. That seems, stacked againstthe me-ness of me, to be disappointingly humdrumeven if there arelots of ions and lots of neurons and lots of really complicated proteinchannels.

Quantum physics, on the other hand, seems more resonant withthose residual dualist hankerings, perhaps by holding out the possibilitythat scientific realism and objectivity melt away in that domain, or eventhat thoughts and feelings are, in the end, the fundamental properties ofthe universe. Explanation of something as special as what makes meme should really involve, the feeling is, something more deep and

mysterious and other worldly than mere neurons. Perhaps what iscomforting about quantum physics is that it can be invoked to explaina mysterious phenomenon without removing much of the mystery,quantum-physical explanations being high mysterious themselves.

[But ] why should it be less scarydegradingreductionist orcounter-intuitive that me-ness emerges from the collapse of a wavefunctiuon than from neuronal activity?53

Fundamental properties of the universe is a big one. Grush andChurchland dont like them one bit, but I am not even sure they speaktheir own entire truth (their tongue in cheek, at more than one level ofirony, aside), a point that I will come back to before the end of this

chapter. Counter their argument, counter the position they makeexplicit, the quantum brain is a powerful metaphor, an alternativeuniverse grounded in at least a patina of science, and a worthy stand-infor the wonders of personal identity in the belly of a society that requiresa physical atlasa superpositional, every-which-way atlas if need befor anything to have standing or legitimacy, even to oneself, in factespecially to ones private censor and witness. We doubt everythingnow, so the quantum realm puts a little ripple into that doubt, whichallows our existential faith to make a bashful appearance alongsideexistential despair.

The quantum brain doesnt have to stop at the boundary ofmatter. With his colleague Stanford neuroscientist Karl Pribram, DavidBohm explained the functioning of the brain as a hologram inaccordance with the waveforms of quantum mathematical functions (aso-called holonomic brain). Echoing elements of panpsychism, he alsotook the position that the contradictions between quantum and relativitytheories indicated a deeper truth, an implicate order (he called it) fromwhich the universe arose as an explicate order. Mind and matter are


11/12

both projections of implicate into explicate order. Matter in explicatespace explains nothing about itselforconsciousness, but its mysteriesare energetically equivalent to those of consciousness and point back toimplicate order.54

Even that brilliant modeler of the quantum brain (Bohm) suffered

from such extreme depression that he willingly underwentelectroconvulsive therapy late in life, a seeming contradiction of his ownparadigm, as there seemed no other option. The master of theholonomic brain submitted under duress to the concreteness of theneuron. But, at some point in this madness, dont we all?

My own provisional preference is that the quantum particle, thequantum brain, and the quantum metaphor exist as spin-offs of thequantum intelligence of the universe, rather than that the quantummind maps onto a quantum brain that generates a quantum waveformof consciousness. I will come back to this topic with a very different sortof modeling in the Cosmic Eternity System in Volume Three.

31. Rick Grush and Patricia Smith Churchland, Gaps in PenrosesToilings,Journal of Consciousness Studies, 2, No. 1, 1995, p. 10.32. ibid, p. 27.33. ibid., p. 10.34. Jeffrey Satinover, The Quauntum Brain: The Search for Freedom andthe Next Generation of Man (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. 2002).35. The Universes We Still Dont Know by Steven Weinberg, The NewYork Review of Books, February 10, 2011, Volume LVIII, Number 2, p. 32.36. Rick Grush and Patricia Smith Churchland, Gaps in PenrosesToilings, pp. 13-14.

37. Roger Penrose, The Emperors New Mind (New York:Doubleday/Vintage Books, 1990).38. S. R. Hameroff, Quantum coherence in microtubules,Journal ofConsciousness Studies, 1 (1), 1994, pp. 91-118.39. Rick Grush and Patricia Smith Churchland, Gaps in PenrosesToilings, p. 11.40. Roger Penrose, Shadows of the Mind: A Search for the MissingScience of Consciousness (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994).41. Rick Grush and Patricia Smith Churchland, Gaps in PenrosesToilings, p. 25.42. ibid.

43. ibid.44. ibid, p. 24.45. ibid, p. 26.46. Henry Stapp, Why Classical Mechanics Cannot AccommodateConsciousness but Quantum Mechanics Can,http://www.nonlocal.com/hbar/qbrain.html#quantumparadigm ), no date.47. David Chalmers in Galen Strawn, Peter Carruthers, Frank Jackson,and William G. Lycan (editors) Consciousness and Its Place in Nature
http://www.nonlocal.com/hbar/qbrain.html#quantumparadigmhttp://www.nonlocal.com/hbar/qbrain.html#quantumparadigm


12/12

(Exeter, England: Imprint Academic, 2006).48. Istvn Dienes, The Quantum Brain and the TopologicalConsciousness http://www.slideshare.net/Dienes/tha-quantum-brain-and-the-topological-consciousness-field-presentation, 2011.49. ibid.

50. ibid (rearranged). Much of the information in this article is drawnfrom August Stern, The Quantum Brain: Theory and Implications,Amsterdam: Elsevier Science, 1994, and August Stern, QuantumTheoretic Machines: What is Thought from the Point of View of Physics(Amsterdam: Elsevier Science, 2000).51. From multiverse through dreamed being is co-created withFrederick Ware.52. Chalmers, op. cit.53. Rick Grush and Patricia Smith Churchland, Gaps in PenrosesToilings, pp. 27-28.54. David Bohn, Wholeness and the Implicate Order(Oxford, England:

Routledge, 2002).
http://www.slideshare.net/Dienes/tha-quantum-brain-and-the-topological-consciousness-field-presentationhttp://www.slideshare.net/Dienes/tha-quantum-brain-and-the-topological-consciousness-field-presentationhttp://www.slideshare.net/Dienes/tha-quantum-brain-and-the-topological-consciousness-field-presentationhttp://www.slideshare.net/Dienes/tha-quantum-brain-and-the-topological-consciousness-field-presentation

quantum brain

Documents