Revisions of #1488

Contributors: Dennis Hackethal
Alan Forrester[^1] [says ‘no’](https://physics.stackexchange.com/a/228643/197081):↵
↵
> Quantum mechanics has almost no bearing on the operation of the brain, except insofar as it explains the existence of matter. You say that signals are carried by electrons, but this is very imprecise. Rather, they are carried by various kinds of chemical signals, including ions. Those signals are released into a warm environment that they interact with over a very short timescale.↵
>↵
> Quantum mechanical processes like interference and entanglement only continue to show effects that differ from classical physics when the relevant information does not leak into the environment. This issue has been explained [in] the context of the brain by Max Tegmark in [The importance of quantum decoherence in brain processes](http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9907009). In the brain, the leaking of information should take place over a time of the order 10^−13 − 10^−20 s. The timescale over which neurons fire etc. is 0.001−0.1s. So your thoughts are not quantum computations or anything like that. The brain is a classical computer.↵
↵
[^1]: Forrester is a former henchman of the very toxic [Elliot Temple](https://blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/what-you-should-know-about-elliot-temple). Approach with extreme caution.

Alan Forrester1 says ‘no’:

Quantum mechanics has almost no bearing on the operation of the brain, except insofar as it explains the existence of matter. You say that signals are carried by electrons, but this is very imprecise. Rather, they are carried by various kinds of chemical signals, including ions. Those signals are released into a warm environment that they interact with over a very short timescale.

Quantum mechanical processes like interference and entanglement only continue to show effects that differ from classical physics when the relevant information does not leak into the environment. This issue has been explained [in] the context of the brain by Max Tegmark in The importance of quantum decoherence in brain processes. In the brain, the leaking of information should take place over a time of the order 10−13 − 10−20 s. The timescale over which neurons fire etc. is 0.001−0.1s. So your thoughts are not quantum computations or anything like that. The brain is a classical computer.


  1. Forrester is a former henchman of the very toxic Elliot Temple. Approach with extreme caution. 

Version 1 · #1488 · Dennis Hackethal · 13 days ago
1 comment: #1490

Fix misquote
 4 unchanged lines collapsed
> Quantum mechanical processes like interference and entanglement only continue to show effects that differ from classical physics when the relevant information does not leak into the environment. This issue has been explained [in] the context of the brain by Max Tegmark in [The importance of quantum decoherence in brain processes](http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9907009). In the brain, the leaking of information should take place over a time of the order 10^−13 − 10^−20 s. The timescale over which neurons fire etc. is 0.001−0.1s.is 0.001 − 0.1s. So your thoughts are not quantum computations or anything like that. The brain is a classical computer. [^1]: Forrester is a former henchman of the very toxic [Elliot Temple](https://blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/what-you-should-know-about-elliot-temple). Approach with extreme caution.
 4 unchanged lines collapsed

Quantum mechanical processes like interference and entanglement only continue to show effects that differ from classical physics when the relevant information does not leak into the environment. This issue has been explained [in] the context of the brain by Max Tegmark in The importance of quantum decoherence in brain processes. In the brain, the leaking of information should take place over a time of the order 10−13 − 10−20 s. The timescale over which neurons fire etc. is 0.001 − 0.1s. So your thoughts are not quantum computations or anything like that. The brain is a classical computer.[1]: Forrester is a former henchman of the very toxic Elliot Temple. Approach with extreme caution.

Version 2 · #1489 · Dennis Hackethal · 13 days ago
1 comment: #1492

Alan Forrester[^1] [says ‘no’](https://physics.stackexchange.com/a/228643/197081):↵
↵
>‘no’](https://physics.stackexchange.com/a/228643/197081), the brain is not a *quantum* computer but a classical one:↵
↵
> Quantum mechanics has almost no bearing on the operation of the brain, except insofar as it explains the existence of matter. You say that signals are carried by electrons, but this is very imprecise. Rather, they are carried by various kinds of chemical signals, including ions. Those signals are released into a warm environment that they interact with over a very short timescale.
 4 unchanged lines collapsed

Alan Forrester[1] says ‘no’, the brain is not a quantum computer but a classical one:

Quantum mechanics has almost no bearing on the operation of the brain, except insofar as it explains the existence of matter. You say that signals are carried by electrons, but this is very imprecise. Rather, they are carried by various kinds of chemical signals, including ions. Those signals are released into a warm environment that they interact with over a very short timescale.

 4 unchanged lines collapsed
Version 3 · #1491 · Dennis Hackethal · 13 days ago