Penrose validated side note on tryptophan.

[Shade]

Penrose validated.



It was Sir Roger Penrose who brought the idea forward, could consciousness be quantum? When Penrose and Stuart Hameroff presented it, it was called “Orchestrated objective reduction (Orch OR)”.

Back story - First it was Penrose who proposed that consciousness was a quantum phenomenon and didn’t happen as a product of nerves firing later Stuart Hamerock added to this in conjunction with Penrose with the hypothesis that consciousness happened inside of neurons as a quantum process orchestrated by the structure of microtubules.

Now onto Penrose.
In the Mid 1990’s Penrose thought it was possible that our brain can produce quantum states inside individual neurons which are then collapsed by gravity waves or a multitude of many other things.

Or for visualization, our brain is like a bunch of tiny quantum computers rather than a single analog computer. These “Quantum Computers” are inside the neurons. Or at least that is what Penrose postulated in the mid 1990’s. (Except with bigger words and more science talk).

He was then criticized by nearly everyone, borderline laughed at. The reason being is that; quantum states are notoriously hard to produce and if they did occur they collapse in a fraction of a second, 10 to the power of -13 or in decimals 0.0000000000001’s of a second.

The Rise of Stuart Hamerhoff
This is where Stuart Hamerhoff the anesthesiologist comes in.
Yes… an anesthesiologist. What is he doing in the field of physics you might ask? Saving Penrose’s bacon, that’s what.

There are different gases anesthesiologists use but none of them should work on Neurons, Hameroff thought that it might actually be working on Tryptophan rings and other various compounds. Tryptophan aka Trp is an Amino Acid that is very common, it creates something called tubulin. These tubulin then create rings that form into microtubules - these complex structures are the basis for pretty much everything because it is an essential building block of life, they are quite literally everywhere.

It was hypothesized by Stuart Hameroff in the 80’s that the anesthesia gas’ change the vibration of these microtubules causing them to collapse in on themselves thus resulting in a person becoming “unconscious”.

They then tested the “Orchestrated Objective Reduction” theory in 2022 and it failed

But then upturned this study that I’ll link down below.

There are two seperate cases in which prove their theory to be right and the first experiment in 2022 may have been botched

It seems as though Penrose and Hamerhoff were validated, more testing needs to be done but it looks promising.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Side note about tryptophan.
Tryptophan absorbs UV light, but it is also Florescent if it receives a certain photon is this why when astral projecting you have a dark purple hue until you get out of the body and the color becomes a florescent purple? Also could this be why the color purple has been linked to the spiritual? Food for thought.

 

[Xenophon]

Penrose validated.



It was Sir Roger Penrose who brought the idea forward, could consciousness be quantum? When Penrose and Stuart Hameroff presented it, it was called “Orchestrated objective reduction (Orch OR)”.

Back story - First it was Penrose who proposed that consciousness was a quantum phenomenon and didn’t happen as a product of nerves firing later Stuart Hamerock added to this in conjunction with Penrose with the hypothesis that consciousness happened inside of neurons as a quantum process orchestrated by the structure of microtubules.

Now onto Penrose.
In the Mid 1990’s Penrose thought it was possible that our brain can produce quantum states inside individual neurons which are then collapsed by gravity waves or a multitude of many other things.

Or for visualization, our brain is like a bunch of tiny quantum computers rather than a single analog computer. These “Quantum Computers” are inside the neurons. Or at least that is what Penrose postulated in the mid 1990’s. (Except with bigger words and more science talk).

He was then criticized by nearly everyone, borderline laughed at. The reason being is that; quantum states are notoriously hard to produce and if they did occur they collapse in a fraction of a second, 10 to the power of -13 or in decimals 0.0000000000001’s of a second.

The Rise of Stuart Hamerhoff
This is where Stuart Hamerhoff the anesthesiologist comes in.
Yes… an anesthesiologist. What is he doing in the field of physics you might ask? Saving Penrose’s bacon, that’s what.

There are different gases anesthesiologists use but none of them should work on Neurons, Hameroff thought that it might actually be working on Tryptophan rings and other various compounds. Tryptophan aka Trp is an Amino Acid that is very common, it creates something called tubulin. These tubulin then create rings that form into microtubules - these complex structures are the basis for pretty much everything because it is an essential building block of life, they are quite literally everywhere.

It was hypothesized by Stuart Hameroff in the 80’s that the anesthesia gas’ change the vibration of these microtubules causing them to collapse in on themselves thus resulting in a person becoming “unconscious”.

They then tested the “Orchestrated Objective Reduction” theory in 2022 and it failed

But then upturned this study that I’ll link down below.

There are two seperate cases in which prove their theory to be right and the first experiment in 2022 may have been botched

It seems as though Penrose and Hamerhoff were validated, more testing needs to be done but it looks promising.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Side note about tryptophan.
Tryptophan absorbs UV light, but it is also Florescent if it receives a certain photon is this why when astral projecting you have a dark purple hue until you get out of the body and the color becomes a florescent purple? Also could this be why the color purple has been linked to the spiritual? Food for thought.

Interesting, though I'll need to slow read it a few times and digest.

One caveat. "There are two separate cases in which prove their theory to be right..."(sic) Actually no theory is ever proven right. Evidence can be heaped up in its favor is all. Any scientific truth is subject to revision. And what can be revised might come to be rejected. Sir Karl Popper made a career out of harping on this point.

 

[Shade]

Interesting, though I'll need to slow read it a few times and digest.

One caveat. "There are two separate cases in which prove their theory to be right..."(sic) Actually no theory is ever proven right. Evidence can be heaped up in its favor is all. Any scientific truth is subject to revision. And what can be revised might come to be rejected. Sir Karl Popper made a career out of harping on this point.

Good catch, honestly towards the end I was rushing it a bit.

 

[Xenophon]

Actually it sounds more compelling for the ol' Greek to hop out of the hot tub shouting, "Eureka!" rather than, "Preliminary evidence indicates that I might have found a simulacrum of what I sought."

 

[Shade]

Actually it sounds more compelling for the ol' Greek to hop out of the hot tub shouting, "Eureka!" rather than, "Preliminary evidence indicates that I might have found a simulacrum of what I sought."

Tbf, I think the “Eurika!” Moment was when Stuart helped bring the concepts together. The title is “Penrose Validated” after all.
and yeah I didn’t get into all the reasons the 2022 experiment was likely botched. Also the 2 things they proved that happen to fit the theory are very important aspects. Also how it ties into spiritual practices I think it’s very likely. It does look very promising imo.

 

[8Lou1]

tryptophan is advised after molly, just like a milkshake. no clue what the 2 have to do with each other, but taken after molly it grounds you and makes you feel 'more body' for lack of other words.

so the purple hues thing might be right. at least it makes sense to me. i remember a disney movie where minions drunk a potion, turned purple and went rogue, got an other potion and lived happily ever after minion style. so there seems to be something to it and it seems to be important enough to put it in a kids cartoon.

 

[Altan]

One caveat. "There are two separate cases in which prove their theory to be right..."(sic) Actually no theory is ever proven right. Evidence can be heaped up in its favor is all. Any scientific truth is subject to revision. And what can be revised might come to be rejected. Sir Karl Popper made a career out of harping on this point.

That never stopped people from getting behind the theory. I don't think science claiming something is true necessarily makes it so, but this is pretty much as close as you can get. The important thing for me is that it ties to other "theories" and models on the subject and supports them. It also means technologically generated consciousness is not going to happen...ever. Frankenstein's monster is the closest one can get, and that is just reviving flesh.

 

[Shade]

also means technologically generated consciousness is not going to happen...ever. Frankenstein's monster is the closest one can get, and that is just reviving flesh.

Unless they are able to figure out how consciousness is drawn out of that quantum state to create and experience, but the way they are going about it is just Algorithmic learning which is the wrong way to go about true AI, in my humble not so well versed opinion.

 

[Robert Ramsay]

That never stopped people from getting behind the theory. I don't think science claiming something is true necessarily makes it so, but this is pretty much as close as you can get. The important thing for me is that it ties to other "theories" and models on the subject and supports them. It also means technologically generated consciousness is not going to happen...ever. Frankenstein's monster is the closest one can get, and that is just reviving flesh.

Proper scientists should never claim anything is "true" - it is all about whether the theory matches with observation. Although you have to bear in mind that quantum theory (for example) matches with observation to as many decimal places as we can measure, so if a scientist says something is "true", it's actually a shorthand for something like that.

When you talk about Frankenstein's monster, it sounds like you are talking about the "philosopher's zombie" or p-zombie, where you have a being that acts and reacts exactly like a human being but has no inner life. This has always annoyed the living piss out of me. Such a thing is impossible. I always struggled to find an argument against it though, until I read Anil Seth's "Being You" which is a great book. He points out that just because we can imagine something, it doesn't mean that it can be physically true.

"We can all imagine a 747 flying backwards, but you will never see one."

 

[Altan]

I've been a researcher in nanotech for years, and most "proper scientists" do not live up to the ideal. As human beings, they have to back their hypotheses because the approximations work for them. Then again, I was an experimental scientist, not a theoretician. They can be in their own little worlds.

I can understand why the P-zombie is an annoying concept. I will even agree that it is hypothetical. But, imitations are not impossible. You look at pixels and the mind sees an image. You look at a caricature of human behavior and fill in the gaps with human bias. People talk to their vehicles, their tools etc. Does that mean they are projecting, or is there something their particular outlook is promoting that wasn't there before (a "spirit", for example)? This is still an occult forum, so such possibilities are within the realm of consideration.

On the same note, (and hopefully staying on topic), inner life (the psyche) can be imitated by a sustainable mechanical processes. They need not be cogs and wheels. They can be molecular behavior at the neurological level. A psychopath, for example, has no true inner life, esoterically speaking, although they are technically human physically and mentally. The distinction, beyond a superficial labelling of symptoms, is beyond the capacities of science, current or otherwise, because science has a specific quantifying and sense-based approach, even in the construction of theory.

Unfortunately, the approach that is so lauded and rational, is based on the workings of only one of our brain hemispheres, with a modicum of support by the other. And science, like religion, is an institution; very formal and mainly honed for technological development. In practice, scientists will bend over backwards for funding, and money- and whatever motives are behind it besides the usual greed - drives the show.

I've seen planes fly backwards when I played video in reverse. I believe there is a modern saying: perception is everything. So if it quacks like a p-zombie etc., you will most likely be experiencing a p-zombie.