The soul as quantum information within microtubules

An interesting new theory on what constitutes the soul.

Read it all here:

A near-death experience happens when quantum substances which form the soul leave the nervous system and enter the universe at large, according to a remarkable theory proposed by two eminent scientists.

According to this idea, consciousness is a program for a quantum computer in the brain which can persist in the universe even after death, explaining the perceptions of those who have near-death experiences.

Dr Stuart Hameroff, Professor Emeritus at the Departments of Anesthesiology and Psychology and the Director of the Centre of Consciousness Studies at the University of Arizona, has advanced the quasi-religious theory.

It is based on a quantum theory of consciousness he and British physicist Sir Roger Penrose have developed which holds that the essence of our soul is contained inside structures called microtubules within brain cells.

They have argued that our experience of consciousness is the result of quantum gravity effects in these microtubules, a theory which they dubbed orchestrated objective reduction (Orch-OR).

Thus it is held that our souls are more than the interaction of neurons in the brain. They are in fact constructed from the very fabric of the universe – and may have existed since the beginning of time.

The ideas of Roger Penrose are not easily trifled with: he is Emeritus Rouse Ball Professor of Mathematics at the Mathematical Institute of the University of Oxford, as well as Emeritus Fellow of Wadham College, and he wrote The Emperor’s New Mind, a book which effectively dismissed the notion that a computer will ever be “intelligent” in any useful sense of the word.

Nevertheless, from a Christian perspective, while he regards mind or soul as more than mere mechanical brain functions – and, interestingly, consistent with Alvin Plantinga’s modal argument for dualism – his theory still won’t quite do.

According to the creation account in Genesis, man was made in the image of God. Man’s spirit, soul and mind are created by God and, just as he exists independently from the material universe, I would contend, also have their essential being outside of our material universe – even the material universe represented by the quantum gravity effects of microtubules.

According to Penrose, if the universe were to cease existing, all the souls that had dissipated to “the universe at large” would also cease to be, a limiting theory quite inconsistent with the Biblical notion of man dwelling in eternity with God.

The meaning of free will: one of the oldest problems in philosophy

Roger Penrose in his book, “The Emperor’s New Mind” effectively demolished the idea that thinking is algorithmic; the belief that artificial intelligence is possible using current computational mechanisms, is also a casualty of Penrose’s reasoning.

Penrose, not being a theist, places more faith in the role of quantum mechanics in the operation of an apparent Cartesian version of free will than, say, a Christian, who might be more inclined to view free will as the result of being made in God’s image.

Some interesting new research on animals shows that, whether his quantum explanation is correct or not, Penrose’s notion that the operation of the brain is not merely algorithmic is confirmed.

From the BBC:

The free will that humans enjoy is similar to that exercised by animals as simple as flies, a scientist has said.

The idea may simply require “free will” to be redefined, but tests show that animal behaviour is neither completely constrained nor completely free.

The paper, in Proceedings of the Royal Society B, suggests animals always have a range of options available to them.

“Choices” actually fit a complex probability but, at least in humans, are perceived as conscious decisions.

The idea tackles one of history’s great philosophical debates, and Bjoern Brembs of the Berlin Free University brings the latest thinking from neurobiology to bear on the question.

What has been long established is that “deterministic behaviour” – the idea that an animal poked in just such a way will react with the same response every time – is not a complete description of behaviour.

“Even the simple animals are not the predictable automatons that they are often portrayed to be,” Dr Brembs told BBC News…..

Christof Koch, a biologist from the California Institute of Technology and frequent author on topics of free will and biology, said that the work hits at the heart of “one of the oldest problems in philosophy”.

In writing about Dr Brembs’ research, he suggested that “the strong, Cartesian version of free will—the belief that if you were placed in exactly the same circumstances again, you could have acted otherwise—is difficult to reconcile with natural laws”.

“There is no way the conscious mind, the refuge of the soul, could influence the brain without leaving tell-tale signs. Physics does not permit such ghostly interactions.”

That last sentence betrays a thoroughly unscientific preconception: that the numinous doesn’t exist. If it does exist, there isn’t any scientific reason for supposing that it could not interact with nature – physics – or, rather physicists – no matter how they exercised their free will, would have little choice but to admit it.