Quantum tunneling and the universe

[Rational T]

If only they were answered in a coherent manner that made any sense.

What was incoherent about it?

 

[Chalnoth]

What was incoherent about it?

Honestly, it's not worth my time. It doesn't have anything whatsoever to do with the topic at hand anyway, as the topic at hand has nothing whatsoever to do with the quantum nature (or lack thereof) of human consciousness. The question of whether or not observation is required to cause decoherence is a separate question, and I've already posted an observational demonstration of the fact that no conscious observer is required whatsoever.

 

[Rational T]

Honestly, it's not worth my time. It doesn't have anything whatsoever to do with the topic at hand anyway, as the topic at hand has nothing whatsoever to do with the quantum nature (or lack thereof) of human consciousness. The question of whether or not observation is required to cause decoherence is a separate question, and I've already posted an observational demonstration of the fact that no conscious observer is required whatsoever.

"Honestly, it's not worth my time. "

So it is worth your time to call something "nonsense" without foundation, but not worth your time to actually support this assertion sufficiently. How convenient...

"It doesn't have anything whatsoever to do with the topic at hand anyway, as the topic at hand has nothing whatsoever to do with the quantum nature (or lack thereof) of human consciousness."

Fair enough, but it is relevant to quantum tunneling models. Quantum Tunneling relies on a wave-function that must collapse. If self-collapsing wave-functions are conscious experiences, then there are huge problems with quantum tunneling models if this fact is neglected. Basically, quantum tunneling models are trying to show that an Atheistic universe is possible. However, if a self-collapsing wave function if a conscious experience, then the model fails at its task.

"The question of whether or not observation is required to cause decoherence is a separate question, and I've already posted an observational demonstration of the fact that no conscious observer is required whatsoever."

Yes, you did, and I appreciate that. You have been very helpful in this thread and I cannot thank you enough. However, your response only works if Orch-Or is false. Since you do not wish to support this assertion, then I'm not sure how valid your response is.

 

[Rational T]

Honestly, it's not worth my time. It doesn't have anything whatsoever to do with the topic at hand anyway, as the topic at hand has nothing whatsoever to do with the quantum nature (or lack thereof) of human consciousness. The question of whether or not observation is required to cause decoherence is a separate question, and I've already posted an observational demonstration of the fact that no conscious observer is required whatsoever.

Either way, I thank you. You have provided many answers that left me with more knowledge than before. So, I do not feel this conversation has been worthless.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Orch-Or, or any quantum conciousness hypothesis for that matter, is not accepted by mainstream neuroscience. At the moment such proposals are little more than speculation with no real evidence to back them up. The time to tentatively accept a hypothesis is after it has met it's burden of proof, not before.