I just came back from a science conference where the speaker heaped scorn on some phenomena which Quote most people believe in Unquote but which are Quote patently wrong..
For example, he selected the theme of telepathy for special scorn. I have no preconceived idea there, but purely scientifically if we agree (Stapp, Penrose, Walker, et al.) that most neuronal firings in the brain involve quantum processes (specifically the participant ions' wave functions becoming correlated with delocalized (i.e., from the not immediately opposite synapse) receptor ions, then couldn't we envision that on occasion, the wavefunction hookup would occur with a synapse in another brain? It is scientifically not at all impossible. How can we dismiss this beforehand, without prior study?
He belabored on with several more examples which simply flew in the face of people's everyday experience (ask me) and which, IMHO, could perhaps be scientifically explained.
This ties in with the fact that there are already very wide-apart interpretations of incontrovertible experimental evidence in the sciences (30-odd interpretations of quantum mechanics, for instance) and also some interpretations of reality by science which seem so slapstick that they drive people away (such as, you have an infinity of exact copies of yourself across the metaverse, Colin Bruce et al., and yes sir we can prove it), and it drives people away from science.
In a world where a broad scientific approach is our only bulwark against obscurantism, I find this arrogance on the part of some scientists absolutely appalling. What do you think?
You claim that: "most neuronal firings in the brain involve quantum processes"
My question is: Doesn't everything that exists involve quantum processes?
from here your suggest that " the wave function hookup would occur with a synapse in another brain"
Then , wouldn't this imply that every quantum process could interact with everything else?
I am not a physicist and I do not understand much about quantum phenomena, however I am puzzled about some claims using quantum theory to explain neurological phenomena and would like to understand the basics.
I can only suggest that you start seriously reading up then.
Two indispensable & excellent general-level places to start would be 'The Physics of Consciousness' by Evan Harris Walker and "Mindful Universe" by Henry Stapp.
Going beyond the initial question to the broader issue, yes, the closed-mindedness of many scientists contravenes the basis of what I learned and value about science: the deep understanding that no theories or data are set in stone. I teach my students to be skeptical and open to the possibility that a study they read tomorrow may upset what we think we know today.
Global warming, anyone?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology