Hacker News Reader

Comment by a3n | Hacker News Reader

I had the same question as your first sentence.

I'm not sure I understand your second sentence, as I don't follow "entanglement news." Is entanglement currently being seen as taking part in everything, everywhere? Specifically in brain processes?

I'm intrigued by your third sentence.

I look forward to more sentences.

View on HN

There is a (decidedly non-mainstream) idea that brain processes involve large-scale quantum effects, that quantum effects beyond just the normally expected biochemistry are essential to the functioning of the brain. There's not really much empirical evidence for it, and about the only theoretical argument is that the brain is much more efficient than a computer. I think people tend to like it because it makes brains (or more specifically human minds) feel more special.

Quantum mechanics and consciousness are both weird and therefore are equivalent

I saw that movie. It also tried to put water memory across as fact.

There's a guy in Twitter who thinks that the brain is an antenna that receives consciousness, or something like that. I'll see if I can find it, but it's kind of hard to navigate Twitter since I got banned.

Edit: I couldn't find it. Something about microtubules

Are these microtubules located in the Pineal gland?

Everywhere

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-30453-2

One of "those guys" is Sir Roger Penrose.

A quick search on "microtubule consciousness" brings forth an enormous amount of spilled digital ink on the subject.

Sabine Hossenfelder had a "science daily" video about it recently on Youtube. Worth a watch/listen.

https://backreaction.blogspot.com/2024/05/brain-really-uses-...

> Is entanglement currently being seen as taking part in everything, everywhere?

Not necessarily what they're saying here (I couldn't grok it either), but there's a bunch of woo being purveyed about "quantum consciousness" by Deepak Chopra recently. Some debates with Sam Harris are fun to watch.

I think they used to be called morphogenic fields by Rupert Sheldrake.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com