How Can the Visual Quantum Information be Transferred to The Brain Intact, Collapsing There and Causing Consciousness?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main problem which this paper tries to address is whether collapse of the wave function describing the state of a quantum mechanical system occurs, or, rather can occur in the brain of the observer or not. One of the first (relatively) detailed “collapse models” following the original abstract suggestion by von Neumann that collapse occurs in the brain of the observer and is related to consciousness, is the Orch OR model of Penrose and Hameroff. This model was first criticized by Tegmark on the ground that due to decoherence, quantum processing cannot occur in the human brain. This criticism was countered by saying that due to structural shielding, microtubules inside the neurons can be protected against the wet and warm environment inside the brain. Thaheld, however, in a number of papers argued that quantum visual information carried by the photons from the environment cannot reach the brain intact. In other words, the quantum states of the photons would collapse inside the human eye and only classical information would finally reach the brain and hence no collapse and quantum processing in the brain can take place. In this paper we advance a hypothesis that there is the possibility for the quantum states of photons to be transmitted to the brain in a quantum-like manner. Our approach is based on the quantum teleportation mechanism which includes both classical and quantum aspects of information transfer, but the process itself is wholly quantum mechanical.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".