🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <67ab52c2.0301071558.7e44fc36@posting.google.com>,
UKComplaint <ukcomplaint@lycos.com> wrote:
>Physicist Henry Margenau (quoted by Sir John Eccles) states that the
>components of the brain 'are small enough to be governed by
>probabilistic quantum laws' and are 'always poised for a multitude of
>possible changes, each with a definite probability'.
>
>Is Margenau's view (that actions in the brain might be subject to
>quantum effects) generally accepted withnin science?

A neuron, the fundamental unit of the brain, is large enough that it is a
thermodynamic system.  It will fire deterministically when the
concentration versus space and time of stimulating minus inhibiting
neurotransmitters is high enough.

>
>N.B. The blurb for the forthcoming Quantum Mind 2003 Conference on
>Consciousness, Quantum Physics and the Brain to be hosted by the
>University of Arizona states "recent experimental evidence suggests
>quantum nonlocality occurring in conscious and subconscious brain
>function, and functional quantum processes in molecular biology are
>becoming more and more apparent."

Maybe they know something I don't.  And maybe the only reason CSICOP isn't 
going nuts debunking them is because it's the sort of materialist view 
they like to see.  I don't really know.


-- 
"A nice adaptation of conditions will make almost any hypothesis agree
with the phenomena.  This will please the imagination but does not advance
our knowledge." -- J. Black, 1803.