Stuart Hameroff's ideas.

Well surely the equation deterministically predicts the evolution of the wavefunction except that from time to time some entity observes the wavefunction and 'collapses' it? That is exactly what I mean.
Well surely that depends on what the aggregate is? I mean if it is a true random number generator, then it is by definition not predictable in the aggregate.
Well my intuition tells me that we control our bodies by 'observing' wave function collapses within our brains and controlling the outcome.

Henry Stapp showed that that process can allow the observer to control a physical system.
Thaybe I'll skip on that.

I agree about Sheldrake, but remember his work always references experiments. I feel theorising can drift way off the mark - the scientific community really needs to stop being afraid of the inexplicable and devise lots of thought-provoking experiments.

David

Ah it has been some time since I opened a physics text book, I was thinking more about stuff like half-lives and photon reflection off glass than the Schrodinger Equation [as means of measurement though the connection to what you were saying should have occurred to me].

I'm not sure there can be a true random number generator if you mean it genuinely has no probability distribution?

Stapp's idea is interesting but controversial. But yes it might be true somehow.

I agree there should be more experiments. It would be interesting to see Tom Campbell and Sheldrake team up. I am hoping whatever big results Hammeroff is set to publish with his colleagues is good enough to really push for, at the very least, the position that quantum biology is involved with consciousness.

Ah it has been some time since I opened a physics text book, I was thinking more about stuff like half-lives and photon reflection off glass than the Schrodinger Equation [as means of measurement though the connection to what you were saying should have occurred to me].

I'm not sure there can be a true random number generator if you mean it genuinely has no probability distribution?

Stapp's idea is interesting but controversial. But yes it might be true somehow.

I agree there should be more experiments. It would be interesting to see Tom Campbell and Sheldrake team up. I am hoping whatever big results Hammeroff is set to publish with his colleagues is good enough to really push for, at the very least, the position that quantum biology is involved with consciousness.

As I see it, the only potential flaw in Stapp's idea is that to make an observation you use a photon or some other particle! The 'observation' ultimately consists of another scattering event!

Some years ago, Sheldrake replied to an email of mine saying he is not doing experiments anymore. Of course, he is still in contact with others who might do experiments. Of course there already is plenty of experiments that people just ignore, for example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6uQQuhi5rs&t=183s

David

As I see it, the only potential flaw in Stapp's idea is that to make an observation you use a photon or some other particle! The 'observation' ultimately consists of another scattering event!

Some years ago, Sheldrake replied to an email of mine saying he is not doing experiments anymore. Of course, he is still in contact with others who might do experiments. Of course there already is plenty of experiments that people just ignore, for example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6uQQuhi5rs&t=183s

David

Yeah I think *if* Hammeroff's yet to be published results are a major game changer it could make people pay more attention to Radin's work.

Though I feel it's always best to temper one's expectation. My guess is Hammeroff et al results will ideally be impressive, but of course they must also stand up to replication.

Stuart Hameroff explains his groundbreaking work with Roger Penrose, and what it illuminates about panpsychism, the origins of life, psychedelics, and the viability of a soul which can exist beyond the grave.

Bandyopadhyay’s experiments at Japans's National Institute for Materials Science (NIMS) show hydrated microtubules electrical resistance drops to 1 ohm above 8MHz. Way below what we would expect in a biological conductor where we usually see resistances in kilo-ohms or higher, 1 ohm is near-metallic conductivity.

Put that together with Pavlo Mikheenko’s work using Magnetic Force Microscopy which suggests that hydrated microtubules exhibit magnetic shielding, that is microtubules excluding magnetic flux (Meissner effect) which is indirect evidence of superconductivity, but strong diamagnetism from aligned water dipoles hasn't been ruled out. Although, I'd argue that the latter phenomena - which could also be responsible for expelling the magnetic flux - may still introduce a natural quantum mechanism, even if not the true brute-force superconductor state we are currently familiar with. Also, strong diamagnetism from aligned water dipoles doesn’t really account for the huge resistance drop Bandyopadhyay’s experiments measured, suggesting there is a quantum superconductive-type effect going on somewhere within these structure. Speculatively, it seems possible to me, that there might actually need to be a strange semi-state mixture on the Microtubule boundary anyway, which allows information to interact between spacetime (everyday world / nature / result), and outside of spacetime (QM / transcend spacetime / wormhole).

Although we have no independent replication of either of their results, neither do we have any studies disputing their results. But there is some indirect support from studies on ordered water, as well as their other experiments.