Conscious Understanding: What is its Physical Basis?

Google Tech Talk
March 10, 2010

ABSTRACT

Presented by Sir Roger Penrose.

Powerful arguments can be given, to support the case that the quality of human understanding is not something that can be simulated in a trustworthy way, by any entirely computational system. If this case is accepted, it raises the question of what deep physical processes and what subtle brain structures might be involved in order that consciousness can come about. Some remarkable new observations concerning A-lattice microtubules will be briefly described, these having considerable relevance to this issue.

Sir Roger Penrose is an English mathematical physicist and Emeritus Rouse Ball Professor of Mathematics at the Mathematical Institute, University of Oxford and Emeritus Fellow of Wadham College. He has received a number of prizes and awards, including the 1988 Wolf Prize for physics which he shared with Stephen Hawking for their contribution to our understanding of the universe. He is renowned for his work in mathematical physics, in particular his contributions to general relativity and cosmology. He is also a recreational mathematician and philosopher.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• google
• tech
• talk
• brain
• consciousness

[RazzaBeeDaSilva]

Im a cunt

[ShiroRX]

You people complaining about the presentation are morons. Every Penrose lecture I've seen he uses a projector like that lol. It might just be what he's most comfortable with, especially seems to personally write out and draw these slides.

[ghostinthemean]

The measurement problem he alludes to is linked to the Copenhagen interpretation of QM, which is no longer in fashion. There is nothing `conscious` needed for the collapse of a photons wave function, it can collapse when it has an effect on matter, causing it to be "measuered"

[DancingSpiderman]

Hahaha !  Penrose's Graduate Assistant writes Roger's projection notes out using crayolas. I bet uncooked macaroni noodles are used for 3-D representations...

[stephentsang2000]

@solidsnake1447

The Secret / Law of Attraction is the most absurd metaphysical bullshit out in the market, only to fatten the author's pockets at the costs of those desperate people yearning for something which are at the mercy of forces that they have no control of.

[solidsnake1447]

@kebilfree17 Finally something that makes sense! Enough of all the "The Secret"/"Law of Attraction" bullshit. They just use the term quantum mechanics because the general public knows nothing about it.

[kebilfree17]

Quantum effects are not necessary for thought to occur other than for the role quantum mechanics play in the properties of individual atoms, and possibly the interactions of atoms with atoms. At the level of larger structures, such as neurons, subcellular components, even microtubules, quantum effects decohere, The quantum effects are averaged out as the objects in question become larger and larger, and as non-quantum physics becoms a more useful description of what is happening.

[kebilfree17]

Microtubules are structural elements of neurons. Neurons are more than enough to carry out all the intellectual activities of any nervous system. Microtubules help neurons function, but they are not the elements of a neuron that process signals. The transfer of electrical and chemical signals in, and in between neurons is what results in the processing of information, the conduction of signals, the production of output, the basis of thought, however you want to describe it.

[kebilfree17]

Sir Roger is an intellectual snob, assuming his expertise in cosmology grants him insights into QM (which he does not understand obviously) and neuroscience (which he, for some reason, assumes needs QM in order to work). The measurement problem he alludes to is linked to the Copenhagen interpretation of QM, which is no longer in fashion. There is nothing `conscious` needed for collapse of a photons wave function, it can collapse when it has an effect on matter, causing it to be "measuered"

[kebilfree17]

Sir Roger is an intellectual snob, assuming his expertise in cosmology grants him insights into QM (which he does not understand obviously) and neuroscience (which he, for some reason, assumes needs QM in order to work). The measurement problem he alludes to is linked to the Copenhagen interpretation of QM, which is no longer in fashion. There is nothing `conscious` needed for the collapse of a photons wave function, it can collapse when it has an effect on matter, causing it to be "measuered"