| >You just placed biology and neuroscience firmly outside of his wheelhouse. For biology he had a collaborator. You aren’t likely to find many biologist / quantum physicists. The term neuroscience wasn’t even coined until after he finished his PhD. You could probably name many other relevant sub specialties that doesn’t have formal training in. If any of his theories are correct, you wouldn’t expect a neuroscientist, or biologist to be equipped to come up with them. >If he is approaching things from a purely hypothetical standpoint it’s an unlikely but reasonable idea He is. His first book essentially had no proposed mechanism. Then an anesthesiologist and researcher read it and contacted him with the proposal that microtubules might provide an environment that is insulated from the normal warm, wet, and noisy environment of the brain. His next book investigated that idea, but he’s repeatedly said that this is just an interesting place to investigate and he has no idea whether it’s true. >but it utterly fails as part of how a larger system we actually understand quite a bit about works. How does it fail? I’ve read quite a hit about it and plenty for people are skeptical but I’ve never seen anyone showing how it “utterly fails”. |
The first car wasn’t called a car by the people who built it, but we back date terms. He’s not a neuroscientist because he’s not studied the brain’s physical structures.
> insulated from the normal warm, wet, and noisy environment of the brain
? The tube is made of atoms at the same temperature as what’s outside the tube, there’s no isolation here.
> How does it fail?
It fails in many many ways. Individual neurons are vastly too small for consensus to occur on that scale you need something involving millions of them at body temperature at the very low end. Local quantum effects are obviously going on but they don’t scale.