Thursday, June 22, 2023

Someone's Brain snaps when I point out Penrose's quantum biology claim on Godel's Incompletely Theorem

Here is a nice example of the kind of self-censorship I deal with online. hahaha. This person somehow got my first account blocked - so I was able to reply via my 2nd account. The person posted: "I think my favorite video explaining Goedel's Incompleteness Theorem is Veritasium's, he does a great job walking a layman through it. If you're actually looking to kind of play around with how this is more formally proven, I really like Raymond Smullyan's book To Mock a Mockingbird which is presented as a long series of logic puzzles using birds that culminates in a proof of the Incompleteness theorem. Goedel, Escher, Bach is another classic book that covers how self-reference is used by all three of them in their various masterworks."
3
Reply
@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885
17 hours ago
or you could just googlescholar "biological annhilation" - the common claim by mathematicians is that "it works" - well if it works so well then why are we accelerating to "biological annihilation"?
Reply
@dugman11111
6 hours ago (edited)
 @voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885  Godel's Incompleteness Theorem has literally zero to do with biology. Are you posting in the wrong thread?
Reply
@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885
3 hours ago
 @dugman11111  Oh so you've never read Stuart Hameroff's quantum biology work in collaboration with Roger Penrose? That's what Penrose calls "protoconsciousness" and as Penrose emphasizes "calculations are not consciousness." Of course if you need to practice self-censorship by creating your own fake boundaries of thinking, that's perfectly common to do. haha.
Reply
@dugman11111
1 hour ago (edited)
 @voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885  Again, Godel's Incompleteness Theorem has nothing, at all, to do with biology. It's a theory about infinite sets of first order logical statements. Biology is an inherently finite system of cells. There's no intersection between the two. (It doesn't even have anything to do with quantum mechanics or the definitions of consciousness either frankly.)
Reply
@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885
56 minutes ago
 @dugman11111  So your youtube troll comment just debunked the Royal Society (formally The Royal Society of London for Improving Natural Knowledge formed in 1660, is a learned society and the United Kingdom's national academy of sciences) Science book of the year award in 2016 for the quantum biology book "Life On the Edge" by Professor JohnJoe McFadden and Jim al-khalili? Wow! Impressive.
Reply
@dugman11111
24 minutes ago
 @voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885  Ok, I’m assuming you just don’t understand the book you’re talking about and/or what Godel’s Incompleteness Theorem is or both. Godel’s Incompleteness Theorem has nothing to do with Quantum Biology, Biology, or Quantum Mechanics, it’s purely a theory about -INFINITE SETS of logical statements-. None of the things you’re talking about are infinite, they’re all finite.

So either you read a book and didn’t understand it or watched the video on the Incompleteness Theorem and didn’t understand it, or both. Either way I know when to block a troll.
Reply
@ecoechocultivation9076
52 seconds ago
 @dugman11111   Godel, the Mind, and the Laws of Physics
Roger Penrose
In Matthias Baaz (ed.), Kurt Gödel and the Foundations of Mathematics: Horizons of Truth. Cambridge University Press. pp. 339 (2011)   Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract
Gödel appears to have believed strongly that the human mind cannot be explained in terms of any kind of computational physics, but he remained cautious in formulating this belief as a rigorous consequence of his incompleteness theorems. In this chapter, I discuss a modification of standard Gödel-type logical arguments, these appearing to strengthen Gödel’s conclusions, and attempt to provide a persuasive case in support of his standpoint that the actions of the mind must transcend computation. It appears that Gödel did not consider the possibility that the laws of physics might themselves involve noncomputational procedures; accordingly, he found himself driven to the conclusion that mentality must lie beyond the actions of the physical brain. My own arguments, on the other hand, are from the scientific standpoint that the mind is a product of the brain’s physical activity. Accordingly, there must be something in the physical actions of the world that itself transcends computation. We do not appear to find such noncomputational action in the known laws of physics, however, so we must seek it in currently undiscovered laws going beyond presently accepted physical theory. I argue that the only plausibly relevant gap in current understanding lies in a fundamental incompleteness in quantum theory, which reveals itself only with significant mass displacements between quantum states (“Schrödinger’s cats”). I contend that the need for new physics enters when gravitational effects just begin to play a role. In a scheme developed jointly with Stuart Hameroff, this has direct relevance within neuronal microtubules, and I describe this (still speculative) scheme in the following. 

 Recent Penrose talk! 

 

No comments:

Post a Comment