Joined: June 2006
|Have you heard of Bucky Balls? These are miniature soccer balls made up of 60 carbon atoms. They demonstrate EPR-like effects. The basic question is, why do Bucky Balls behave differently than normal soccer balls? Penrose offers it is due to their mass.|
By the way, Penrose and Stephen Hawking had a famous debate over this issue in 1994. While Hawking didn't agree with Penrose, he didn't suggest Penrose's idea was "absurd". I would be curious as to what Hawking thinks about it today in light of advances in maintaining superposition longer and with larger massed objects.
The SchrŲdinger's cat paradox refuses to go away by itself. Penrose's OR quantum interpretation explains it.
Penrose has suggested an experiment named FELIX to test his hypothesis with a tiny mirror. The mirror is would have just the right mass to be in superposition for the forward going light beam but not for the return.
Buckminster fullerines don't behave like normal soccer balls because their quantum wavelength is proportional to their size (deBroglie's equation). That's essentially the best way for determining whether something will exhibit quantum effects. In addition, nuclear spin quantum computers have made use of a rather large molecule (like the one that figured out that 15 factors into 3 and 5), however, there's big difference between 1 molecule of a substance and 1 mol.
I'm not here to debate with you the primary tenets of quantum mechanics; I know things like Schroedinger's cat are physical implications for the wave-like behavior of light and particles. (An aside: "Dead" is not a quantum state, it's a macroscopic description of the animal, what we're really asking is: which detector fired? That requires collapsing the wave function in order to fire the gun, release the poison, whatever.) What I called "absurd" was ignoring the effects of the EM potentials and interactions, when they are much more dominant than gravity. You can't just handwave it away and say it will be fine, especially when the quantum computer is immersed in a electric dipole fluid along with one of the strongest ferromagnetic substances. That's absurd. All of this makes it less feasible that our brain can properly transport quantum information.
|You are correct that currently it doesnít appear we are capable of developing long term quantum memory, yet (we are working on it). However, we do know the photons can avoid decoherence for years. I donít know if any scientific observation like this has been done for cosmic particles other than photons. Do you know of any? I will look for them.|
Penrose argues against Strong AI. That is, Penrose argues the human mind canít be a consistent formal algorithm. And pseudorandom generators donít help (they are algorithms). Here is Planet Math's analysis of it. Penrose argues that Quantum effects are non-algorithmic and non-random. Ergo, it is extremely likely the human mind (consciousness) depends on quantum effects.
Whether or not Artificial Intelligence could have been accomplished without quantum effects has probably become a moot point since AI researchers are now designing quantum computers into their systems.
Photon states work differently than electrons, they're based on the polarization rather than the spin state. We typically refer to them as flying qubits, and in fact some basic quantum cryptography systems (random number generators, AEC transmission lines) have already been created (google Magiq). Unfortunately, as you know, lower energy photons (like the kinds that would be safe to transmit through the body) are absorbed and scattered easily by electrons. They wouldn't make very good transmitters in our bodies.