Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: js1138; Right Wing Professor
Thank you for your posts!

I think I figured out where the failure to communicate happened. The Kaivarainen article is not speaking of electromagnetic effects external to the body on microtubals within the brain, but the physics involved (including electromagnetism) within the microtubal and among microtubals within the brain itself.

Your complaint is with external electromagnetic waves having any effect on brain function. The only strong wave-effect allegation I've seen is the one mentioned in the lawsuit I've been following.

Abraham's article has nothing to do with electromagnetism, he was only offering an alternative to the step-time worldview to deal with time related phenomenon already identified by experiment.

The International Institute of Biophysics interest is in ultralow photon emissions.

With regard to external forces, Kaivarainen mentions this:

The Brownian effects, which influence reorientation of MTs system and probability of cavitational fluctuations, stimulating transition in nerve cells - represent in our model the non-computational element of consciousness. Other models (Wigner, 1955 and Penrose, 1994) relate this element to wave function collapse. The closest he gets to a universal consciousness or spirit realm is in the Appendix, where he discusses Penrose's wave function collapse and concludes:

In our model the "tuning" of microtubules orientations, dependent on thermal fluctuations, is another explanation of "collapsing" of neurons group, leading to noncomputable "choosing" of one state from huge number of possible. It is accompanied by redistribution of synaptic contacts due to distant (but not nonlocal) electromagnetic and vibro-gravitational resonant interactions between MTs.

Our model agrees with general idea of Marshall (1989) that Bose-condensation could be responsible for "unity of conscious experience." However, our model explains how this idea can work in detail and what kind of Bose condensation is necessary.

With regard to Penrose, here is a link to his response to critics of Shadows of the Mind: Beyond the Doubting of a Shadow

14.7 Energy gaps and symmetry breaking, of this general nature, are central to the understanding of superconductivity - and superconductivity is one of the few clear phenomena in which large-scale quantum coherence takes place. Known observationally since 1911, and explained quantum-mechanically in 1957, superconductivity had been thought originally to be an exclusively very low-temperature phenomenon, occurring only at a few degrees above absolute zero. It is now known to occur at much higher temperatures of -158 degrees Celsius, or perhaps even -23 degrees (although this is not properly explained). It does not seem to be out of the question that there might be similar effects at the somewhat higher temperatures of microtubules. Perhaps there are understandings to be obtained about the behaviour of microtubules from the experimental insights gained from such high-temperature superconductors.

14.8 Another question frequently asked is: what's so special about neuronal microtubules, as opposed to those, say, in liver cells? In other words, why isn't your liver conscious? In answer to this, it should be said that the organization of microtubules in neurons is quite different from that in other cells. In most cells, microtubules are organized radially, from a central region (close to the nucleus) called the centrosome. In neurons, this is not the case, and they lie essentially parallel with one another along the axons and dendrites. The total mass of microtubules within neurons seems to be much greater than in other cells, and they are mainly stable structures, rather than in most cells, where they continually polymerize and depolymerize (grow and shrink). Of course, there is much to be learned about the respective roles of microtubules in neurons and in other cells, but there does seem to be clear enough evidence for an essentially distinct role for (some of) those in neurons. (The A-lattice/B-lattice question would seem to be of importance here also.)

14.9 In this connection, I should mention something of considerable interest and relevance that I learned recently from Guenther Albrecht-Buehler (1981, 1991), which concerns the role of the centriole, that curious "T" structure (roughly illustrated in Shadows, Fig. 7.5, on p.360), consisting of two cylinders resembling rolled-up venetian blinds, constructed from microtubules and other connectingsubstances, which lies within the centrosome. In Shadows, I had adopted the common view that the centrosome acts in some way as the "control centre" of the cytoskeleton of an ordinary cell (not a neuron), and that it initiates cell division. However Albrecht-Buehler's idea about the role of the centriole is very different. He argues, convincingly, in my opinion, that the centriole is the eye of the cell, and that it is sensitive to infra-red light with very good directional capabilities. (Two angular coordinates are needed for identifying the direction of a source. Each of the two cylinders provides one angular coordinate.) Impressive videos of fibroblast cells provide a convincing demonstration of the ability of these cells to pinpoint the direction of an infra-red light source. This also provides some remarkable evidence for individual cells having considerable information-processing abilities, which is at variance with current dogma. One may well ask where the "brain" of a single cell might be located. Perhaps its structure of microtubules can serve such a purpose, but it does seem that the centrosome itself must have some central organizing role. In a single (non-neuronal) cell, the microtubules emanate from the centrosome. I gather from Albrecht-Buehler that the specific contents of the centrosome are not known. It seems that it would be important to know what indeed is going on in the centrosome. Does it have some information-processing capabilities? Is there conceivably some structure there that is capable of sustaining quantum coherence in any form? The answers to questions of this nature could have considerable importance.

14.10 I should make clear that I am not arguing for any consciousness (or consciousness of any significant degree) to be present for individual cells. But according to the views that I have been putting forward, some of the ingredients that are needed for actual consciousness ought already to be present at the cellular level. Individual cells can behave in strikingly sophisticated ways, and I find it very hard to see how their behaviour can be explained along entirely conventional (classical) lines.


846 posted on 02/23/2003 8:57:07 AM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 844 | View Replies ]


To: Alamo-Girl
One of my gripes with Penrose, et al is that he has jumped into speculation about quantum computing in the brain without exhausting more mundane explanations. It seems premature to try to explain consciousness without working your way up from descriptive explanations of "lesser" brains.
847 posted on 02/23/2003 9:09:51 AM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 846 | View Replies ]

To: Alamo-Girl
Bose condensation of most matter requires microkelvin temperatures. Cooper pair formation by electrons (which is the basis of supercondctivity) is about as strong as an interaction between elementary particles in condensed matter can get, and it disappears around 120K. You can observe other coherent quantum pheomena in solids, and rarely liquids, but they're scattered by random thermal motion of the atoms, and their lifetimes become short (i.e. sub microsecond) by about 100K. At room temperature (300K), atoms are vibrating incoherently at high amplitude, and the coherences that link quantum states are destroyed on a nanosecond timescale. Trying to contruct a model for consciousness based on q.m. is like trying to build a house of cards on a rowboat in a hurricane.
896 posted on 02/24/2003 3:27:02 PM PST by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 846 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson