tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1733988359835604469.post2849398043348172324..comments2023-06-14T04:42:37.404-07:00Comments on Science is a method, not a position: Interview with a quantum physicist. . .M.C.http://www.blogger.com/profile/13310971675352307226noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1733988359835604469.post-53278736401351171042007-10-07T03:48:00.000-07:002007-10-07T03:48:00.000-07:00Quantum physics has always facinated me, you're no...Quantum physics has always facinated me, you're nothing or your the sole frame of reference, am I actually writing this comment or am I just lost in the illusion that I am, if its an illusion for me why is it the same for someone in the next room, is it because of the interconnectedness?Karanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06881897334868004662noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1733988359835604469.post-21012805348169403072007-04-30T13:13:00.000-07:002007-04-30T13:13:00.000-07:00I read the entire interview and something struck m...I read the entire interview and something struck me as very interesting. Herbert talks about concsiousness as being vastly less powerful in terms of bit processing than the brain, something like 2 to 4 bits versus the 1012 bits the brain processes. He makes the point that consciousness seems to exert tremendous influence given that it is so low-powered.<BR/><BR/>This makes me wonder, how can consciousness be based solely in the brain when it is such a weak effect in computing terms? I understand that Herbert was comparing the brain's ability to receive vast amounts of information and process much of it unconsciously, but does it make sense that the control device of such a powerful computer would be so weak? Or is it that consciousness is not entirely based in the brain? <BR/><BR/>Very interesting. It appears the realms of frontier physics and consciousness studies are converging.Book Surgeonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13619492768967118149noreply@blogger.com