this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2026
250 points (93.1% liked)

Technology

86816 readers
3831 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] CatAssTrophy@safest.space 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)
  1. I said nothing about souls. If I'm talking about souls (without direct prompting), I'm deep in a psychotic episode.

  2. I don't really get what you mean by the gestures broadly thing? I'm very open to an expansion on that thought, but have no current sense of what that means.

  3. It's not just the vague idea of quantum hootnannies, it is the fact that intentionally inducing extra quantum hootnannies in the brain structure of animals has a noticeable impact on the effects of various anesthesia, i.e. the "anti-conciousness drugs".

I'm not claiming there is definitive proof, I'm simply stating there is some real, empirical evidence that supports the notion that consciousness is an emergent property reliant upon a maybe narrow range of emergent effects from quantum mechanics that are inherently absent from Turing machine computational models.

[โ€“] BenevolentOne@infosec.pub 1 points 1 month ago

I spent a couple days on and off reading about this theory, I read a few papers in the field and some of Penrose's work (I didn't go grab his books). So, thanks. It was interesting. I have had some physicists mention to me in passing that quantum consciousness was a junk field, but I hadn't looked into it.

I agree, this is definitely bullshit.

  1. Penrose himself attempts to dodge this in the first paragraph, but why are we groping for a special theory of consciousness at all?

  2. Quantum mechanics is in everything, without it, fundamental processes (like light passing through your window) can not adequately be explained. Just because something has 'got a quantum' or whatever doesn't instantly make it special from a physical perspective (you don't see scientists tossing out conversation of energy or causality because stuff's 'got a quantum' or whatever).

  3. You might be interested in some of the recent work demonstrating that anesthetics work on plants. Not a microtubule in sight.