= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Johnicholas comments on Open Thread: November 2009 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (539)
I have a question for the members of LW who are more knowledgable than me in quantum mechanics and theories of quantum mechanics's relevance to consciousness.
There are examples of people having exactly the same conversation repeatedly (e.g. due to transient global amnesia). Is this evidence against quantum mechanics being crucial to consciousness?
Thermal noise dominates quantum noise anyway. I suppose it argues that if you don't depend on thermal noise then you don't depend on quantum noise either, but the Penrosian types claim it's not really random anyway.
It's evidence against chaotic or random processes being important, but quantum computing needn't mean random (i.e. high variance) results; AFAIK, it can in principle be made highly predictable.
Wait, I think I know what the question is, now. Yes, this thing seems to suggest that human thinking is well-approximated as deterministic - a hypothesis which matches what I've heard elsewhere. Off the top of my head:
I once read a story about a guy being offered lunch several times in a row and accepting again and again and again in similar terms until his stomach felt "tightish".
There was a family friend taking sleeping medication which was known to cause sleepwalking, and she had an entire phone conversation with her friend in her sleep - and then called the same friend after waking up planning to discuss the same things.
Of course, the typical quantum-mechanical stories of consciousness are far too vague to be falsified by this or any other evidence.
Edit: As Nick Tarleton cogently points out, this is an exaggeration - it is certainly falsifiable in the way phlogiston or elan vital is falsifiable, by the production of a complete correct theory, and it is further so by e.g. uploading.
They could be falsified by successful classical uploading or an ironclad argument for the impossibility of coherence in the brain (among other things); furthermore, I think most of their proponents who are actual scientists would accept such a falsification.
You're right, of course - editing in a note.
I don't think anyone holds that human behavior is always undetermined in the way particles are. The reason no one holds that view is that it would contradict the work of neuroscientists, the people, you know, actually making progress on these questions.
Citations?
I can't find the link because of censorship on my work computer, but there was a description of orgasm-induced transient global amnesia that made the rounds recently.
Google: orgasm transient global amnesia
That's an odd phenomenon, but I don't think that it, specifically, is especially relevant to quantum mechanics' relevance to consciousness. The chief problem with the proposals that quantum mechanics is directly involved in consciousness is that they constitute mysterious answers to a mysterious question.
The only reference on google related to "transient global amnesia" and quantum is this thread (third link down).
This is the story in the news. Some may prefer the paper itself.
I'm surprised to hear this question from you. Does this comment mean that you seriously consider this quantum consciousness woo? Why on Earth?
No, I'm just looking for solid evidence-based arguments against it that don't actually depend on me knowing lots of QM.
In that case you need killer evidence, something to take back an insane leap of privileging the hypothesis, not some vague argument around amnesia.