Was Penrose Right? NEW EVIDENCE For Quantum Effects In The Brain on HackerTube: recommended by 2 Hacker News commenters across 2 separate months, 2024–2026.
explainer · intermediate · dated
PBS Space Time examines Roger Penrose's idea that consciousness arises from quantum processes in the brain, and reviews new evidence about microtubules. It ends with an estimate of what replicating consciousness would demand.
Pointed to as a clear, balanced overview of quantum-brain theories when AI consciousness and brain models come up.
“check especially the ending summary where they calculate more or less how much would be necessary”
5 Hacker News comments link this video. Each one links back to its thread.
there is a theory by the brilliant Roger Penrose and extended by others that the brain is just not neurons but also quantum effect which would make it impossible to emulate via current technology excellent PBS Space Time on that * ▶ this video
in “Could a computer scientist build a brain?” · View on HN
There's a few videos by Sabine/Anton and also now PBS about Microtubules and conciousness, it's starting to gain ground and If I were an AI company right now I'd be having cold sweat. Video of reference (check especially the ending summary where they calculate more or less how much would be necessary just to replicate a human mind's way of achieving conciousness if microtubules in fact contribute towards it): ▶ this video
in “Nvidia reportedly delays its next AI chip due to a design flaw” · View on HN
sociopaths sometimes study people to learn how to emulate emotion that's exactly the state of "AI" right now, it's cold, mathematical emulation btw there are some fascinating papers on the concept that consciousness in humans is actually a quantum effect brilliant Roger Penrose proposed it (and they thought he was nuts) but recent discoveries about microtubules make it plausible so who knows, maybe a dozen exponential improvements in quantum computers could make "AI" really conscious next century * ▶ this video
in “No, Artificial Intelligence is not Conscious - Ted Chiang” · View on HN
I have completed an interview with a neurosurgeon recently. I'm writing an article for a big magazine about AI and Brains, and I was given a chance to get some comments from a neurosurgeon about AI, thinkingness and how he things things work. I can't disclose the contents of the interview, this is under NDA till published. But, gosh, was that bad. I thought neurosurgeon would know something about thinking process, and stuff like that. The guy in a state of a total despair. When I was bashing him with questions about the purpose of a brain and all that stuff, he was almost crying. He ended up telling me that he hopes that someone will find quantum entanglement in the brain, and everything will be fine after that. After he sent me to this from PBS Science. ▶ this video
in “A history of metaphorical brain talk in psychiatry” · View on HN
I gave you an example, qualia. I gave you another example, the philosophical zombie problem. The latter has real implications, how can we know whether or not a coma patient is conscious? There's new evidence to support the idea of quantum effects in the brain. Far from conclusive, but it does give a little credibility to the idea. ▶ this video There's also a hypothesis that the electromagnetic field produced by the brain could be the "carrier of conscious experience", which would at least solve the binding problem. But you're very hand wavy and simply disregard my examples. Instead, you throw around the word "mystical" without giving a clear definition, which makes it too easy for you to move the goal post. And then you simply refer to the brain as a "bag of stuff", which is a gross oversimplification.
in “Scientism” · View on HN