Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Georgina Woodward: on 10/1/22 at 3:34am UTC, wrote 'verisimilitude' is a nice word.

R.H. Joseph: on 9/30/22 at 19:53pm UTC, wrote "[H]ow consciousness plays with quantum mechanics, our theory of the very...

Steve Dufourny: on 6/18/22 at 16:21pm UTC, wrote The point important at my humble opinion to understand this consciousness...

Steve Dufourny: on 6/18/22 at 13:40pm UTC, wrote it is a new physics and we need to know more, how they interact, how are...

Steve Dufourny: on 6/18/22 at 12:40pm UTC, wrote We see that all this needs to understand our deepest unknowns and mainly...

Steve Dufourny: on 6/18/22 at 10:47am UTC, wrote All this is very interesting about the gravity-related dynamical...

Steve Dufourny: on 6/18/22 at 10:23am UTC, wrote Here is the results like pre proof of Catalina Curceanu , I have discussed...

Steve Dufourny: on 6/17/22 at 16:39pm UTC, wrote Professor Hameroff, I have asked to Catalina Curceanu like you asked if...



FQXi FORUM
October 1, 2022

ARTICLE: Can We Feel What It’s Like to Be Quantum? [back to article]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Robert H McEachern wrote on Apr. 3, 2022 @ 19:02 GMT
"The problem is, quantum mechanics has some notoriously fuzzy features, like an uncertainty principle that prevents you knowing everything about a particle at the same time. These seem to put it at odds with our everyday experience of a concrete, definite reality."

It is Shannon's Capacity, not small physical size, that "prevents you knowing everything about a particle at the same time", even in "our everyday experience". The real problem is, that in "our everyday experience", you will rarely ever encounter any objects with a severely limited Shannon Capacity - until you deliberately construct them; just as you will rarely encounter highly unstable isotopes, until after you construct them.

It is easy to show that the uncertainty principle corresponds precisely to a Shannon Capacity of exactly one bit of "information", corresponding to either an "up" or a "down" observable state.

If you take the trouble to actually construct, and then attempt to "observe", classical entities, that manifest only one single bit of Shannon's "information" (rather different than any physicist's conception of "information"), you will find that those entities behave just like quantum particles.

Rob McEachern

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Robert H McEachern wrote on May. 7, 2022 @ 13:59 GMT
Here are some further insights into the nature of Shannon's "Information" and hence, into the nature of the problems within, fundamental physics.

Rob McEachern

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Stuart Hameroff wrote on Jun. 16, 2022 @ 22:41 GMT
Did the experiments support Penrose OR which does not predict radiation?

How did the results fail to support Penrose-Hameroff Orch OR?

Seriously.

As an advocate of Orch OR I'd be happy to try and defend it against criticism.

But I dont see any actual criticism.

Thanks

Stuart Hameroff

hameroff@u.arizona.edu

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Jun. 17, 2022 @ 09:29 GMT
Hi Professor Hameroff, we have discussed on the post of Catalina Curceanu about your works to Penrose and you, you are relevant , thanks for sharing

here is the dicussion

Catalina Curceanu

Stefano Machera infatti - capito bene

RépondreVoir la traduction2 j

Steve Dufourny

Stefano Machera Hello . Penrose and Hameroff have good ideas with the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Jun. 17, 2022 @ 09:51 GMT
The orchestrated objective reduction for me is very relevant and is one of the vbest model actually. The key is indeed at this quantum level. The neurons and microtubules like result of evolution so permit this consciousness and the free will can be indeed correlated.

I have a model due to my theory of spherisation , it is an optimisation evolution of the universal sphere or future sphere...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Jun. 17, 2022 @ 09:59 GMT
You know Professor Hameroff I have remarked that philosophically speaking the majority consider the photons and the GR like the primary essence , and so that the fields of this GR and due to the matter energ equivalence of einstein is the origin of the standard model and the bayonic matter with oscillations and so they consider a kind of vacuum and harmonical oscillators to explain this reality but if the GR and these photons are not the only one piece of puzzle and that this cold dark matter and this DE must be added, all is different. I doubt really that this universe has only created photons you know and that a kind of god or a mathematical accident play with these fields and oscillations vibrations in 1D at this planck scale inside these photons and that all is under the main cosmic field in 1D of this GR. They consider so 2 E8 mainly to unify G c and h and reach or explain our deepest unknowns. Maybe the error is there , we trurn in round in a kind of philosophical prison.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 18, 2022 @ 16:21 GMT
The point important at my humble opinion to understand this consciousness is to really extrapolate this general philosophy of origin of the universe and understand why we exist, why we are conscous. We are resulsts of evolution and this evolution has permitted to create the life and the complexification of this life. We know the mendeleev table,the chemistry, the biology, the neurosciences, this...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


R.H. Joseph wrote on Sep. 30, 2022 @ 19:53 GMT
"[H]ow consciousness plays with quantum mechanics, our theory of the very small."

I cannot help thinking of Plotinus: "Vision is not constrained by the bournes of magnitude."

For the sake of argument, let us allow that the locus of self-awareness presents as a singularity coalescent with emptiness. Prior to self-reflection and the reification of the perceived, the unity of primordial...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate
Georgina Woodward replied on Oct. 1, 2022 @ 03:34 GMT
'verisimilitude' is a nice word.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.