And Hoffman takes it to Lalaland.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1571064513001188
Volume 11, Issue 1, March 2014, Pages 39-78
#Review
Consciousness in the universe: A review of the ‘Orch OR’ theory
Author Stuart Hameroffa, Roger Penrose
Abstract
The nature of consciousness, the mechanism by which it occurs in the brain, and its ultimate place in the universe are unknown.
**We proposed in the mid 1990’s that consciousness depends on biologically ‘orchestrated’ coherent quantum processes in collections of microtubules within brain neurons, that these quantum processes correlate with, and regulate, neuronal synaptic and membrane activity, and that the continuous Schrödinger evolution of each such process terminates in accordance with the specific Diósi–Penrose (DP) scheme of ‘objective reduction’ (‘OR’) of the quantum state.
This orchestrated OR activity (‘Orch OR’) is taken to result in moments of conscious awareness and/or choice.**
The DP form of OR is related to the fundamentals of quantum mechanics and space–time geometry,
so Orch OR suggests that there is a connection between the brain’s biomolecular processes and the basic structure of the universe.
Here we review Orch OR in light of criticisms and developments in quantum biology, neuroscience, physics and cosmology.
We also introduce a novel suggestion of ‘beat frequencies’ of faster microtubule vibrations as a possible source of the observed electro-encephalographic (‘EEG’) correlates of consciousness. We conclude that consciousness plays an intrinsic role in the universe.
An objection that enunciates part of my problem with this OrchOR daydreaming (other part being that Penrose ignores biological evolution):
"I am always perturbed by ‘reductionist’ thinking. Penrose wants to reduce ‘consciousness’ to quantum effects. Why not accept that ‘emergent phenomena’ don’t necessarily obey the ‘laws’ of quantum physics. That they can transcend them. ‘Gross’ matter does not obey the laws of quantum mechanics; why should consciousness, which is a non- quantum phenomenon, be different? "
Malcolm Goodson
"Roger Penrose is one of the most creative minds in mathematical physics. He wrote over 300 papers and is mostly known for his work on general relativity and black holes. "
In other words, he hasn’t had the time to study evolution or biology. He’s a master mathematician and a pretty good hand at aperiodic tessellations:
Here’s another critique
Penrose read too much into Godel’s theorem - and then announced (In the Emperor’s New Mind) that AI MUST BE IMPOSSIBLE!!.
Because computational processes running on matter can’t do certain things.
But he sort-of forgot that human beings are, in fact, computational processes running on matter too.
His arguments not only applies to silicon chips but also to human brains. And in the corner he had found himself.
Whereupon he had to come up with some explanation to account for the observed difference. What additional magical component could meaty brains use? And so he posited his notion of spooky quantum effects to explain consciousness. Because, you know?.. quantum!
Although to the best of my knowledge, he has yet to attach any predictive power to this theorem, nor explain why we couldn’t build a chip with “quantum nanotubes”.
Glyn Williams, studied at Royal Holloway, University of London Answered Nov 3, 2015