South Africa Flag logo

South African Skeptics

November 21, 2019, 23:33:42 PM
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
Go to mobile page.
News: Please read the posting guidelines before posting.
   
   Skeptic Forum Board Index   Help Forum Rules Search GoogleTagged Login Register Chat Blogroll  
Pages: 1 2 [3]  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic:

Quantum Mechanics and Consciousness (split)

 (Read 11967 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Teleological
Moderate Realist
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +2/-28
Offline Offline

Posts: 980

Ex Nihilo Nihil Fit


« Reply #30 on: August 04, 2009, 08:08:21 AM »

Feel free at any time to explain in simple language what you have cited.  That would be for the benefit of the less technically-minded reader.  Otherwise one might start to suspect that you’re having people on.

'Luthon64
Well at least you know there is a testable model. I'll try and slap together the lay man's version for the benefit of the less technically-minded reader. Goodness knows don't want them to try and figure it out for themselves Wink.
Logged
cyghost
Skeptically yours
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +12/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 1410


Carpe diem


« Reply #31 on: August 04, 2009, 08:22:56 AM »

Should we hold out breaths or will we expire if we do?
Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 3756


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #32 on: August 04, 2009, 08:52:20 AM »

Well at least you know there is a testable model.
Only in your imagination do I or anyone else know such a thing.  The paper deals with a simulation of an electron quantum tunnelling effect in microtubules at around ambient temperature.  It doesn’t even mention consciousness.

I'll try and slap together the lay man's [sic] version for the benefit of the less technically-minded reader. Goodness knows don't want them to try and figure it out for themselves Wink.
Yes, please do, seeing as you’re the expert on this.  We are after all here to learn.  Personally, I don’t mind if you also show the mathematics of this marvellous transition from quantum effects to consciousness.  In fact, it would be great if you did just that.  Then, and only then, can we start using phrases like “testable model.”



Should we hold out breaths or will we expire if we do?
I’d say not.  Oxygen starvation to the brain is likely to turn one into an IDiot or a cretinist.

'Luthon64
Logged
Teleological
Moderate Realist
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +2/-28
Offline Offline

Posts: 980

Ex Nihilo Nihil Fit


« Reply #33 on: August 04, 2009, 08:58:08 AM »

Well at least you know there is a testable model.
Only in your imagination do I or anyone else know such a thing.  The paper deals with a simulation of an electron quantum tunnelling effect in microtubules at around ambient temperature.  It doesn’t even mention consciousness.
Microtubules - information processing - consciousness... Is it possible that consciousness relies on information processing structures  Shocked?

I'll try and slap together the lay man's [sic] version for the benefit of the less technically-minded reader. Goodness knows don't want them to try and figure it out for themselves Wink.
Yes, please do, seeing as you’re the expert on this.
Nope, sorry, I have never claimed to be an expert, I am not. I am trying to understand it like any other person here  Smiley. Emphasis on trying...


Logged
cyghost
Skeptically yours
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +12/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 1410


Carpe diem


« Reply #34 on: August 04, 2009, 09:05:48 AM »

Nope, sorry, I have never claimed to be an expert, I am not. I am trying to understand it like any other person here  Smiley. Emphasis on trying...
If this was true, you wouldn't be getting the flak you are.
Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 3756


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #35 on: August 04, 2009, 12:08:09 PM »

Microtubules - information processing - consciousness... Is it possible that consciousness relies on information processing structures  Shocked?
Possible, yes, even likely.  But a conjecture plus some wishful and deeply ignorant inference on your part doesn’t add up to a fact, a point you have repeatedly shown yourself incapable of apprehending.  You keep treating this whole topic as if it was a fait accompli (and in the process torturing several scientific disciplines and certain aspects of its methodology near to death).  It’s clear enough at this point that you have no actual respect for science, merely a shabby pretence to it.



Nope, sorry, I have never claimed to be an expert, I am not.
Agreed.  On both counts.  Nonetheless, the absence of a direct claim notwithstanding, try to read your own posts impartially – that is, if you can.  They’re positively drenched in implied “I’m the expert” sauce.



I am trying to understand it like any other person here  Smiley.
Ha ha, good one!  If that were true, you’d answer questions and actually consider what others here tell you, instead of deploying that fine collection of dodges and ruses you have put on display again and again.

See?  Another thread moved, at least in part, to Flame Wars.  One must wonder why.

Anyhoo, what’s your estimated timeframe on the layman’s explanation that was requested here?

'Luthon64
Logged
mdg
Sr. Member
****

Skeptical ability: +5/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 337



WWW
« Reply #36 on: August 04, 2009, 13:56:30 PM »

Quote from: Mechanist
Well at least you know there is a testable model. I'll try and slap together the lay man's version for the benefit of the less technically-minded reader. Goodness knows don't want them to try and figure it out for themselves .

I assume you are referring to me here. You're right, I'm not technically minded at all and have a bit of a hard time following the discussion, but then I'm not a biologist or expert on Creationism, such as you, so I lack the knowledge to argue with you.

Quote from: Mechanist
Nope, sorry, I have never claimed to be an expert, I am not.

Please read 'Luthon64's answer below again, every post screams "I'm so much more intelligent than you are". You have put yourself across as an expert, and an arrogant one at that as evidenced by your in your answer, quoted right at the top.I'm so sorry that you feel that you have to lower your great intellectual abilities to answer some of the questions in layman's terms for the benefit of stupid people like me. Another reason that it's been hard to follow is because I have to wade though pages of information that in the end turn out to be a waste of time.

Quote from: Mechanist
I am trying to understand it like any other person here  .

No you're not. You're trying to preach and show everyone here how very clever you are. You seem incapable of answering any question in a straightforward way, perhaps it's got to do with your need to show us what a genius you are - I bow before your superior intellect.

Quote from: Anacoluthon64
.......... instead of deploying that fine collection of dodges and ruses you have put on display again and again.

Mechanist would put an Olympic gymnastic team to shame with his mental acrobatics.

Let me add one more thing before I leave to go and wallow in my pool stupidity and lack of technical ability. The difference between Mechanist and David Mabus/Nstra is this, David Mabus is a nutjob, but relatively harmless. Mechanist on the other hand is much more dangerous and insidious, it's people like him who get elected into influential positions and who then proceed to destroy good science with bad reasoning. It's people like him who are elected to school boards and who then proceed to poison children's minds with pseudoscientific trash.

Quote from: Mechanist
Goodness knows don't want them to try and figure it out for themselves

as we intellectually challenged people like to say,.......Up Yours.




Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 3756


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #37 on: August 04, 2009, 16:18:29 PM »

There, now you’ve gone and alienated one of the very gentlest of forum members, Mechanist.

Good going.  What’s the tally so far?

'Luthon64
Logged
mdg
Sr. Member
****

Skeptical ability: +5/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 337



WWW
« Reply #38 on: August 06, 2009, 10:09:07 AM »

Quote from: Anacoluthon64
There, now you’ve gone and alienated one of the very gentlest of forum members, Mechanist.

LOL!  Grin

I apologise if I broke any forum rules with my reply. I had spent ages reading through Mechanists posts and had had enough with the nonsense I read through. I hadn't participated in the debates and thought I would learn something from them with regard to his posts one DNA,etc - thank gawd for people like Mefiante (aka 'Luthon64) who write in such a concise and clear way that even I - the dumbass - was able to follow what was going on.  Grin

@ Mefiante, I like the new nym - it even has a lovely romantic ring to it too.  Wink
Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 3756


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #39 on: August 06, 2009, 13:07:11 PM »

Nothing to apologise for, at least by my reckoning.

Thanks for the kind words, and welcome to full membership. Grin

'Luthon64
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]  All   Go Up
  Print  


 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Page created in 0.935 seconds with 23 sceptic queries.
Google visited last this page April 09, 2019, 04:16:56 AM
Privacy Policy