Fallacious logic.
Let me clarify.
At one time Einstein was accused of spoutig nonsense , until it was proven he was not.
I didn’t think I needed to clarify that old adage.
It’s not an adage. It’s not statistics.
The fallacy has a name
Yeah that publication is bullshit:
“Therefore, learning
from a book, especially one about nature, should be efficient and enjoyable. Avoid bad
learning methods like the plague! Do not use a marker, a pen or a pencil to highlight or
underline text on paper. It is a waste of time, provides false comfort and makes the text
unreadable. And do not learn from a screen. In particular, never, ever, learn from the internet, from videos, from games or from a smartphone. Most of the internet, almost all
videos and all games are poisons and drugs for the brain. Smartphones are dispensers of
drugs that make people addicted and prevent learning. Nobody putting marks on paper
or looking at a screen is learning efficiently or is enjoying doing so.”
Already starts off smug and condescending and doesn’t get better.
Like I said you don’t understand this stuff and neither do the people you cite. Either way this is irrelevant.
Except he’s not Einstein, not that it matters. Einstein was shown to be correct, he however was not. Simple as.
Read the definition again
adage = a proverb or short statement expressing a general truth.
From Hypatia to Galileo to Bohm to Newton to Darwin to Einstein to Turing to Hawking to Penrose, all were accused of presenting false hypotheses’
Plus a few more here.
All were exonerated when their hypotheses were mathematically proven to be true.
Not Penrose. Also that list means nothing, there are literally hundreds more who are crackpots or peddled wrong theories.
The wiki article literally explains why what he argues is false.
No it does not . The noisy wey argument has been proven wrong.
MT are able to handle quantum data long enough for functional action in their environment.
Note that quantum is not necessarily at Planck scale
Depends. The general consensus is that quantum field theory fails at the energy scale we call the Planck scale. At this scale, quantum gravity becomes important, and perturbative quantum field theory can no longer make reliable predictions.Aug 13, 2023
Hence Penrose’s non-computable but orchestrated objective reduction
See my thread on microtubules.
Incorrect, that’s not how quantum effects work. They break down at macro levels hence can’t avoid decoherence.
Hence no. Also like I said that thread was nonsense. You cling to one guy who no one takes seriously on this issue. He’s just wrong on this. Happens to every Nobel winner weirdly enough. They all promote some sort of quackery after winning something in legitimate science, even Einstein did it when he endorsed a psychic.
Like I said, he’s just some guy.
It’s not generally true. It’s an anecdote
Yeah, yeah, I heard that argument a long time ago and it was made by one of my favorite scientists, Max Tegmark.
But that was years ago. Today we play a whole different ballgame in brain research.
Quantum Fiber Optics In The Brain Enhance Processing, May Protect Against Degenerative Diseases
Insider Brief
- Howard University-led research team has discovered a distinctly quantum effect in biology that survives difficult conditions in the brain.
- The effect may also present a way for the brain to protect itself from degenerative diseases like Alzheimer’s.
- The findings were published in The Journal of Physical Chemistry.
- Image: Life has thus found a way to exploit molecular symmetries to enhance collective quantum optical behaviors, which are robust to warm and wet environments. Credit: Quantum Biology Laboratory: Nathan Babcock and Philip Kurian
The star of the study is tryptophan: a molecule that is most associated with turkey dinners but is also found in many biological contexts. As an amino acid, it’s a fundamental building block for proteins and larger structures made from those proteins, such as cilia, flagella, and centrioles.
i.e. microtubules.
A lone molecule of tryptophan displays a fairly standard quantum property: it can absorb a particle of light (called a photon) at a certain frequency and emit another photon at a different frequency. This process is called fluorescence and is very often used in studies to investigate protein responses.
But the study found that a strange thing happens when many, many tryptophan molecules are arranged in a symmetrical network like they are in larger structures like centrioles—they fluoresce stronger and faster than they would if they were fluorescing independently. The collective behavior is called “superradiance,” and it only happens with single photons because of quantum mechanics.
This makes “pyramidal neurons” particularly suitable as symmetrical MT networks.
This result demonstrates a fundamental quantum effect in a place where quantum effects are not typically expected to be able to survive: a larger object in a warm, “noisy” environment.
“This publication is the fruit of a decade of work thinking of these networks as key drivers for important quantum effects at the cellular level,” said Kurian.
“It’s a beautiful result,” said Professor Majed Chergui of The Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (EPFL) in Lausanne, Switzerland, who led the experimental team. “It took very precise and careful application of standard protein spectroscopy methods, but guided by the theoretical predictions of our collaborators, we were able to confirm a stunning signature of superradiance in a micron-scale biological system.”
Nope. Article is incorrect, they already found out the issues Alzheimers plays in the body and it turns out it has to do with the gut, not tryptophan.
Nope.
Like…again still wrong on all levels. And again still not relevant to the discussion, not since the start.
Maybe try less sketchy websites.
Einstein didn’t know squat about biology either.
What’s your point, quantum level insights don’t help with bio-chemistry or neurology, or evolution of creatures upon this planet.
How dare you! You come stomping in pretending to be expert at what?
I challenge you to provide proof of your “gut theory” that is supposed to affect the function of brain neurons.
Do you even know what inhabits the gut and digests your food?
It was literally all over the news a few years ago. Meanwhile you just have quantum nonsense from tiny publications that don’t mean anything.
You don’t understand this stuff. It was the same with Seth’s video. You really just don’t comprehend the things you post.
Even if it was true it’s not relevant to the thread or discussion.
Yes, but there have been great scientists in all disciplines who came up with new theories that were dismissed for centuries before they were accepted .
OTOH, science used bad science for 2000 years before we corrected it.
Not really, they just peddle their stuff to someone who will listen, that’s how flat earth and vaccine denial are a thing.
Most scientists are not charlatans.
It is the system that creates commercialism
Watch Sabine Hossenfelder and why she is posting on YouTube.
2 Likes
Hence?
Bit of a leap isn’t it? A statement about quantum something, then “hence”.
quote=“inthedarkness, post:136, topic:10989”]
It was literally all over the news a few years ago. Meanwhile you just have quantum nonsense from tiny publications that don’t mean anything.
Yes, that objection was many years ago and has recently been answered.
And the name Penrose means a lot more than your name.
And as long as you believe that thinking is done in the gut, your contribution to a discussion on neural processes in the brain is absolutely worthless.
I know. It’s all about you, isn’t it?