I was doing some research on my fave subject (yes boring i know).

And i came across this paper which demonstrates how plants use qm in order to maintain 95%+ efficiency in the transfer of photons to molecular energy during photosynthesis.

http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/...m-secrets.html

So if plants use qm then is it not logical to assume other biology is also using qm in ways we have yet to identify?

One track mind?
Why not introduce this into some of the threads you have on the subject as evidence? Or something...
Or if you throw it in a new thread, and act innocent, does it somehow make it seem more plausible to what your actually trying to tie it in with?

Well, describing anything in enough details brings in quantum mechanics, so it's more a matter of working out how rather than if.

LOL This is the problem; no matter what i do with it i will be accused, persecuted and treated with great insensitivity. Poor me

But seriously am i the only one who finds this interesting? I'm starting to think i should head to a doctor and ask for a check-up.

So i take that as you thinking that qm is probably used in lots of different ways by biology but its just a case of finding out how?

I do find it interesting.
One part of deterministic understanding is dealing with the quantum level.

What concerns me when you bring it up is that you seem more likely to throw it out there as a mystery that somehow justifies arguments in favor of quantum instantaneous tunneling, Observer affect, ghosts and Spirituality and all kinds of things.
You seem to think you can Slide science over into a realm where it doesn't necessarily belong.

Look at your Posted Thread OP's. They ask about Greater Divine Purposes, etc.
I mean, can you blame me? At all? For following the pattern here? Last time you were gadfly'ed. Maybe this time you saw it coming.
But don't play the "poor me- I would have been attacked no matter what" card.
It doesn't apply.
Had you used it to properly present a case- no one could use that against you.

You throw it out as a new thread as if asking an innocent question.
Again.
But it isn't.
It's still ATM.

Neverfly,

"What concerns me when you bring it up is that you seem more likely to throw it out there as a mystery that somehow justifies arguments in favor of quantum instantaneous tunneling, Observer affect, ghosts and Spirituality and all kinds of things."

What has this to do with ghosts and spirituality? Is that fair to tarnish me with that brush? In fact plants using qm for photosynthesis could be an argument against my observer-centric view of qm; as it would mean plants are capable of collapsing a wave function. I would not normally think of plants as observers but there you go.

"Look at your Posted Thread OP's. They ask about Greater Divine Purposes, etc."

Where? The only one which could possibly be interpreted as promoting such silly views would be the "practical functions of biology" thread, and that was a question about whether biology played a practical role in the universe. That thread got highjacked by individuals claiming that means " divine purpose" and i argued that is not what i meant.

I really think its unfair to denigrate anything i have to say with the old "mystical" brush.

"But don't play the "poor me- I would have been attacked no matter what" card.
It doesn't apply.
Had you used it to properly present a case- no one could use that against you."

I did add smilie faces to infer a joke at my own expense. Gosh, even self-denigration doesn't work

What case is there to make about this post re quantum photosynthesis? I posted it because i just came across it doing research into biology harnessing qm. I find it facinating and was wondering out loud what it may indicate about other biological systems utilising qm for other functions.

There is nothing ATM about this subject as the paper above is evidence of qm being harnessed by biology.

By the way, lets just get this straight regarding what excatly you view as subversive about my views on qm interpretations? I take a literal view of CI and as far as i can see there is nothing ATM about that since interpretations have nothing to do with the maths of qm. Additonally if the "measurement problem" had been resolved you may have a point but the fact it is still a wide open enigma indicates that ther is no clear consensus on an interpretation.

I want some clarity about why you keep accusing me of mystical views. Spell it out for me and we can discuss it. I think you owe me that since you keep bringing it up on just about every thread i comment on.

I need to rush off to work now- but good point.
I think I'll bring this up in PM with you and see if we can understand eachother.
But it will have to wait til later.

Fair enough. I look forward to your PM when you have the time.

Well everything can be described in terms of quantum mechanics on a small enough scale. There isn't anything that can't be described in terms of quantum mechanics, but finding out the details is supposed to be tricky.

The blue colours in the feathers of birds is caused, at least partly, by a non-classical diffraction effect, which involves quantum effects on the smallest scale.

__________________
New Orion's Arm Site . The Starlark . Against a Diamond Sky (OA Novella Collection) . OA Flickr set

Yes i think its very tricky, especially if its hard to catch the organism red handed (so to speak).

Well; I do think that there is a track record being mixed into this. I will wait and see, and leave it up to Neverfly's PM.

I doubt that, but what does this have to do with life in space?

I agree with Ronald Brak. This is interesting because of the observation and the technology of the detection.

Hey, why not? It's a good idea whether this thread is a symptom, or not.

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

The wave function collapses every time any two particles interact. That´s the problem with the notion of 'observer', which is a classical one, and should be properly redefined in dealing with qm. Classical 'observers' like me and you are really big things, and a clasical 'observation' [seeing things] is a macro phenomenon.

If they are made of particles capable of interacting with other particles, then they are observers too, though not the classical kind.

__________________
What brings us together is stronger than what pulls us apart

I'll look that up - thanks. Quantum vanity?

I wonder if biology needs to evolve these functions as they do all the other traits and characterstics. Perhaps there were plants once that conducted energy transfer through classical mechanics and they became extinct to the current ones which could transfer energy more efficiently?

NEOWatcher,

Stop it, I'm enough of a hypochondriac already

"but what does this have to do with life in space?"

Its not that far off - we are life in space from an external perspective. Aliens could be using the same energy transfer function? Chewbacka?

Using that logic, I could put just about anything in that category. Sorry; but that's way too much of a stretch.

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

earth is in space, earth has life on it, so is not anything on earth also in space? ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
<smiley face>

__________________

-work in progress--

seriously, i actually find the article fascinating. you should also check this out too:

http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retri...0698770400252X

Can the human brain do quantum computing? .

Medical Hypotheses , Volume 63 , Issue 5 , Pages 895 - 899

A . Rocha , E . Massad , F . Coutinho


also
http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/...mputation.html

and here
http://www.psychservices.psychiatryo...full/53/9/1185
and here:
http://www.auroville.org/education/e..._anastasia.htm


this is a good one too:

http://www.arts.uwaterloo.ca/~sreinis/quantum.html
"A quantum hypothesis of brain function and consciousness"

__________________

-work in progress--

Sabianq,

Thanks for the links. I'm aware of the Hameroff research and also that other theory he developed with Penrose. The Satinover book looks very interesting ; the free-will angle etc...

I'm not sure what to think about quantum processes in the brain. It would be nice if quantum biological functionality stretched that far, as things would get mighty interesting re: "consciousness".

Apparently the skeptics claim the brain is too hot and wet for coherence to occur; thats their main argument i believe. I'm not sure whether this quantum effect in photosynthesis falsifies that argument or not.

This is one is really interesting: Quantum Zeno Effect Underpinning the Radical-Ion-Pair Mechanism of Avian Magnetoreception"
http://arxiv.org/abs/0804.2646

"The intricate biochemical processes underlying avian magnetoreception, the sensory ability of migratory birds to navigate using earths magnetic field, have been narrowed down to spin-dependent recombination of radical-ion pairs to be found in avian species retinal proteins. The avian magnetic field detection is governed by the interplay between magnetic interactions of the radicals unpaired electrons and the radicals recombination dynamics. Critical to this mechanism is the long lifetime of the radical-pair spin coherence, so that the weak geomagnetic field will have a chance to signal its presence. It is here shown that a fundamental quantum phenomenon, the quantum Zeno effect, is at the basis of the radical-ion-pair magnetoreception mechanism. The quantum Zeno effect naturally leads to long spin coherence lifetimes, without any constraints on the systems physical parameters, ensuring the robustness of this sensory mechanism. Basic experimental observations regarding avian magnetic sensitivity are seamlessly derived. These include the magnetic sensitivity functional window and the heading error of oriented bird ensembles, which so far evaded theoretical justification. The findings presented here could be highly relevant to similar mechanisms at work in photosynthetic reactions. They also trigger fundamental questions about the evolutionary mechanisms that enabled avian species to make optimal use of quantum measurement laws"

I´m disturbed that he uses words like In recent years I have considered that such a connection to the basic proto-conscious level of reality where Platonic values are embedded is strikingly similar to Buddhist and other spiritual concepts

Hmm, I would prefer an absoultely materialistic discourse; a hard core science approach.

__________________
What brings us together is stronger than what pulls us apart

Argos,

Yes i agree. I watched him give an lecture which was actually very interesting and "plausible" to some extent. But then near the end he started trying to tie it in with Eastern spiritual concepts and I thought it was unnecessary.

I'm also not keen on the idea of a platonic counsciousness which kind of exists "out there".

However, I take my hat off to Hameroff because he's been pretty brave and stuck his neck out for the idea of quantum consciousness. And he also stuck through it for the last few years where many neurologists and phycists such as Tegmark (2000) claimed the brain was too wet and noisy for coherence to occur. That argument against quantum consciousness now appears to be unsupportable considering all the new papers showing quantum effects in noisy and wet places...including liquids.