Can quantum physics explain synchronicity, telepathy, precognition etc? A new paper by Roger Penrose and this guy is suggesting perhaps yes.

 

 

Martin!  You read my mind!  I was just thinking about this! 😳

44 minutes ago, charliearon said:

Martin!  You read my mind!  I was just thinking about this! 😳

 

Well I think information can go forward AND back in time. So the you from the future that thought about this sent the information back to me so I posted it.

Did someone mention synchronicity?

"Packed like lemmings into shining metal boxes, contestants in a suicidal race" Not much has changed since the 80's. 🙄

 

 

 

Edited February 15, 20224 yr by martin-w
Added something awesome. The Police at their best.

Who knows, Mr Sting's obsession with Carl Jung's synchronicity may have some merit if the Penrose Hameroff paper has merit. 

Oh my ...

Roger Penrose is a great scientist and fully deserves his Nobel prize, which he got for work he did in the 1960s and 70s. The stuff with Hameroff is highly controversial and plays no role whatsoever in modern quantum research. In short, the answer to your question is a big NO, and I am certain that almost all quantum physicists would agree with that assessment.

Just to set the facts in the video straight:

- There is no evidence whatsoever for entanglement in biological systems. There is one single recent experiment that claims to have entanglement created between a superconductor and a tardigrade ( https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.07978 ), but this is still under review, and the initial response in the community was not very positive. Furthermore, they cooled the tardigrade down to almost absolute zero to be able to see what they observed (which may or may not have been entanglement). In a human brain at room temperature, any entanglement would be destroyed within a matter of picoseconds.

- You cannot transfer signals faster than light with entanglement. In the video, Hameroff is a bit shaky on that. Entanglement is a form of correlation, and to measure correlations between two detectors, the two parties involved have to compare the outcome of their  measurements. To compare the data, you have to send them using light or electric current, and that does not work faster than the speed of light. This is the "classical channel" that Hameroff refers to.

- Quantum cryptography does not need entanglement. The BB84 protocol (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BB84) only needs single photons to be exchanged for each bit transfer. The E91 protocol actually uses entanglement, but just because it is an available resource, not out of necessity.

- The "new paper" by Penrose and Hameroff appears to not have been published yet.

- I personally do not like at all if someone invokes quantum gravity to explain something extraordinary. Quantum gravity is an insanely complex theory that is not very well understood. Using that to explain consciousness seems to follow Truman's advice: “If you can't convince them, confuse them.” 

Peter

 

1 hour ago, qqwertzde said:

There is no evidence whatsoever for entanglement in biological systems

 

Agree re entanglement. What about photosynthesis and the quantum walk?

Edited February 15, 20224 yr by martin-w

1 hour ago, qqwertzde said:

. In short, the answer to your question is a big NO,

I didn't ask a question. 😁

2 hours ago, martin-w said:

I didn't ask a question. 😁

Yes you did 🙂

"Can quantum physics explain synchronicity, telepathy, precognition etc?"

3 hours ago, martin-w said:

 

Agree re entanglement. What about photosynthesis and the quantum walk?

Quite possible, and in some ways even very likely. Having said that, it really depends on how meticulous you are. Quantum physics and classical physics are not totally different. Some aspects of quantum physics (like entanglement) have no classical counterpart. However, much (not all) of the dynamics of an atom or molecule can actually be understood in classical terms. Processes like the emission of light by an atom could be understood in terms of an equivalent classical model for an atom. The more rigorous minds would say that light emission is therefore not a quantum process, and I would agree. This also applies to photosynthesis: a full quantitative description almost certainly requires quantum mechanics, but an excellent approximate description might be possible with a simple classical model. 

Generally, one can show that quantum physics is completely equivalent to a classical probability theory as long as you only measure one particular quantity (e.g., the energy of a molecule in photosynthesis). In order to see a true quantum phenomenon that has no classical counterpart, one needs to measure at least two different observables, and they have to be of a special kind (non-commuting, but that is very technical).

Synchronicity? It's an 80's album by The Police. Silly people.

But the real question is.....since time knows no direction, why can we remember the past but not the future?

I've spent many hours in hangars and have never heard a single physics discussion such as this. Usually we discussed aviation related topics and how good the new waitress in the cafe looks. 😁

12 hours ago, qqwertzde said:

Yes you did 🙂

"Can quantum physics explain synchronicity, telepathy, precognition etc?"

 

It was an imposter. 😃

12 hours ago, Adrian123 said:

Synchronicity? It's an 80's album by The Police. Silly people.

 

Of course it is. And a superb one. Hence why I gave you the remastered version above. 👍

9 hours ago, 188AHC said:

I've spent many hours in hangars and have never heard a single physics discussion such as this. Usually we discussed aviation related topics and how good the new waitress in the cafe looks. 😁

 

That's because you weren't in the hangar at the same times as Joseph Walker. Test pilot for NASA and physicist. 

And of course Louis De Broglie was famous for PILOT wave theory. 🤣