Anonymous
6/19/2025, 12:53:32 AM No.105635597
can quantum immortality be real?
Replies:
Thread 105635597 - /g/ [Archived: 891 hours ago]
Anonymous
6/19/2025, 12:58:02 AM No.105635639
>>105635597 (OP)
No, it's a highly theoretical concept that requires multiple anti-Christian postulates
No, it's a highly theoretical concept that requires multiple anti-Christian postulates
Anonymous
6/19/2025, 1:00:39 AM No.105635660
>>105635597 (OP)
>can quantum immortality be real?
could be...
Penrose believes that such deterministic yet non-algorithmic processes may come into play in the quantum mechanical wave function reduction, and may be harnessed by the brain.
He argues against the viewpoint that the rational processes of the mind are completely algorithmic and can thus be duplicated by a sufficiently complex computer.
Penrose and Hameroff have argued that consciousness is the result of quantum gravity effects in microtubules, which they dubbed Orch-OR (orchestrated objective reduction).
In January 2014, Hameroff and Penrose ventured that a discovery of quantum vibrations in microtubules by Anirban Bandyopadhyay of the National Institute for Materials Science in Japan[76] supports the hypothesis of Orch-OR theory. A reviewed and updated version of the theory was published along with critical commentary and debate in the March 2014 issue of Physics of Life Reviews.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Penrose
>can quantum immortality be real?
could be...
Penrose believes that such deterministic yet non-algorithmic processes may come into play in the quantum mechanical wave function reduction, and may be harnessed by the brain.
He argues against the viewpoint that the rational processes of the mind are completely algorithmic and can thus be duplicated by a sufficiently complex computer.
Penrose and Hameroff have argued that consciousness is the result of quantum gravity effects in microtubules, which they dubbed Orch-OR (orchestrated objective reduction).
In January 2014, Hameroff and Penrose ventured that a discovery of quantum vibrations in microtubules by Anirban Bandyopadhyay of the National Institute for Materials Science in Japan[76] supports the hypothesis of Orch-OR theory. A reviewed and updated version of the theory was published along with critical commentary and debate in the March 2014 issue of Physics of Life Reviews.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Penrose
Replies:
Anonymous
6/19/2025, 2:09:39 AM No.105636169
I believe in Integrated Information Theory, which postulates our consciousness is substrate independent. I doubt quantum immortality could be real as we yet don't have the technology or knowledge to test such a theory, but it would make subjective experience a more interesting phenomenon. If we make a computer conscious, capable of subjective experience, would they also experience such phenomenon?
Anonymous
6/19/2025, 2:16:20 AM No.105636220
>>105635597 (OP)
No, the concept of the individual is too strong. A clone of me with the same memories is not me.
No, the concept of the individual is too strong. A clone of me with the same memories is not me.
Replies:
Anonymous
6/19/2025, 2:31:03 AM No.105636310
Also it's pretty evident that you have no awareness of your past lives so whether they exist or not is immaterial.
Anonymous
6/19/2025, 2:34:17 AM No.105636322
it's kind of retarded the more you think about it because of how many people died before modern medicine existed
Anonymous
6/19/2025, 2:36:07 AM No.105636337
>>105636220
>A clone of me with the same memories is not me.
Sure I guess but that's what your clone would say
>A clone of me with the same memories is not me.
Sure I guess but that's what your clone would say
Replies:
Anonymous
6/19/2025, 2:59:29 AM No.105636489
>>105635660
Interesting.
Maxwell wasnt convinced of only 3 dimensions
Gotta spiral up some quartz rocks
What polytope would a microtuble IMPLY
Interesting.
Maxwell wasnt convinced of only 3 dimensions
Gotta spiral up some quartz rocks
What polytope would a microtuble IMPLY
Replies:
Anonymous
6/19/2025, 3:22:08 AM No.105636623
>>105636337
and we'd agree
and we'd agree
Anonymous
6/19/2025, 6:02:59 AM No.105637511
>can quantum immortality be real?
>could be...
>Penrose believes that such deterministic yet non-algorithmic processes may come into play in the quantum mechanical wave function reduction, and may be harnessed by the brain.
>He argues against the viewpoint that the rational processes of the mind are completely algorithmic and can thus be duplicated by a sufficiently complex computer.
>Penrose and Hameroff have argued that consciousness is the result of quantum gravity effects in microtubules, which they dubbed Orch-OR (orchestrated objective reduction).
>In January 2014, Hameroff and Penrose ventured that a discovery of quantum vibrations in microtubules by Anirban Bandyopadhyay of the National Institute for Materials Science in Japan[76] supports the hypothesis of Orch-OR theory. A reviewed and updated version of the theory was published along with critical commentary and debate in the March 2014 issue of Physics of Life Reviews.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Penrose
>could be...
>Penrose believes that such deterministic yet non-algorithmic processes may come into play in the quantum mechanical wave function reduction, and may be harnessed by the brain.
>He argues against the viewpoint that the rational processes of the mind are completely algorithmic and can thus be duplicated by a sufficiently complex computer.
>Penrose and Hameroff have argued that consciousness is the result of quantum gravity effects in microtubules, which they dubbed Orch-OR (orchestrated objective reduction).
>In January 2014, Hameroff and Penrose ventured that a discovery of quantum vibrations in microtubules by Anirban Bandyopadhyay of the National Institute for Materials Science in Japan[76] supports the hypothesis of Orch-OR theory. A reviewed and updated version of the theory was published along with critical commentary and debate in the March 2014 issue of Physics of Life Reviews.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Penrose
Replies:
Anonymous
6/19/2025, 6:07:29 AM No.105637534
>>105637511
>>105635597 (OP)
>>105635660
>DARK MATTER MAY CONTRADICT OUR CURRENT MODELS OF THE UNIVERSE, BUT THEYRE STILL CORRECT BECAUSE..
>BECAUSE THEY JUST ARE OKAY!!!!!!!!!!
>>105635597 (OP)
>>105635660
>DARK MATTER MAY CONTRADICT OUR CURRENT MODELS OF THE UNIVERSE, BUT THEYRE STILL CORRECT BECAUSE..
>BECAUSE THEY JUST ARE OKAY!!!!!!!!!!