Debunking quantum consciousness “theories”
A theory should have meaningful predictive power and should predict unusual and unexpected phenomena.
The idea that consciousness is associated with quantum mechanics is almost as old as quantum mechanics. One of the first published references to that idea is referred to as “Wigner’s Friend,” and contemplates whether an observer of an experiment causes the observed outcome by virtue of consciousness. There is a veritable cottage industry of “theories” about quantum consciousness, none of which have yet been proven or even predicted anything unusual and unexpected that is directly related to consciousness. As a result, quantum mechanics has been rejected by nearly all neuroscientists as being necessary to explain consciousness.
Since the proposal of Wigner’s Friend, evidence of many quantum biological processes has been obtained. For example, photosynthesis, the mitochondrial electron transport chain, electron and proton tunneling in proteins, and magnetoreception are some of the more widely accepted biological processes that may benefit from a quantum mechanical component to explain how they work. There are still many scientists who are either sufficiently unfamiliar with quantum mechanics to have an opinion about whether quantum mechanics is involved in those processes, or who simply refuse to even consider whether that could be the case. Most neuroscientists who are willing to concede that quantum biology might actually exist have drawn the line at consciousness, and typically express that even if there is some quantum biological component to neuroscience (say, in the electron transport chain), that it is not needed to explain consciousness.
One of the most elegant expressions of that position is provided by Stanislas Dehaene, who writes in regard to quantum consciousness “theories” that “these baroque proposals rest on no solid neurobiology or cognitive science.” (Consciousness and the Brain, pg. 263). For many engaged in the debate, battle lines have been drawn. On the one side, you have Prof. Dehaene, one of the pioneers of cognitive neuroscience who has made many important discoveries that explain how neural functions are associated with cognitive processes, and many other neuroscientists who have clearly demonstrated that there are neural correlates of consciousness. On the other side, you have those who are convinced that consciousness and quantum mechanics are “somehow” related. Is there any evidence of a link between quantum biology and neural correlates of consciousness? If a quantum consciousness “theory” doesn’t provide that link, does it even need to be debunked, or is it effectively “pre-bunked?”
One important quantum biological process that has generally been ignored is electron tunneling associated with ferritin, an iron storage protein complex. This electron tunneling mechanism appears to be involved not only in neural functions, but also in many other biological processes. As early as 1988, it was suggested that electron tunneling could explain some of the unusual electrical properties of ferritin, and proof of that outside of a biological environment was first obtained in 2005. Since then, numerous electrical experiments have confirmed that electrons can tunnel into and out of the core of ferritin, but biologists have not yet applied that work to investigate whether it is present in biological processes.
Tests on human substantia nigra pars compacta (SNc) tissue performed by EAG Labs in Silicon Valley have provided evidence of electron tunneling associated with ferritin in that neural tissue. That work was performed following the publication of a hypothesis of neural signaling that was based in part on the previously observed physical phenomenon of electron tunneling associated with ferritin, a hypothesis that predicted those experimental results. In addition, the hypothesis predicted that a switching mechanism would be provided by ferritin, and subsequent testing produced evidence that ferritin can provide a switching mechanism using what is known as a Coulomb blockade. Thus, the neural signaling hypothesis has predictive power. But how would that relate to consciousness?
The Coulomb blockade mechanism results from what are known as “strong” interactions between electrons. Electrons carry a negative charge and repel each other. However, when electrons tunnel between quantum wells, like those formed in the core of ferritin (or quantum dots which have some important similarities to ferritin), they can experience collisions with other electrons that result from the electrons trying to tunnel to the same place. Because only one electron can occupy a space, a second electron that also tries to occupy that space will be repulsed and can experience a strong interaction with the first electron. Those collisions can result in strong correlations between those electrons, where the physical properties of the two electrons are entangled. Unlike some types of entanglement, there is no “collapse” of the wave function associated with the entangled properties, and strongly correlated particles do not remain entangled over large distances when separated. Instead, the entanglement results from the continuing interaction of many particles, which is referred to as the many-body problem.
In large ferritin arrays, like those found in the SNc, there can be millions if not billions of strongly correlated electrons. Those entangled electrons can extend into numerous neurons, and the neural signaling hypothesis can explain how a specific action is selected using this mechanism, which is presently not something that classical neuroscience can explain. Subsequent research demonstrated that dopamine release by the SNc neurons modulates moment-by-moment activity and mediates action selection, as predicted by the neural signaling hypothesis, and contrary to earlier research that concluded that the SNc does not code movement. Thus, the electron tunneling mechanism avoids the “baroque proposals” critique of Prof. Dehaene, as it not only rests on solid neurobiology and cognitive science, but it has also made predictions of unusual and unexpected discoveries in neurobiology and cognitive science that were subsequently made by others.
But how does this neural signaling mechanism explain consciousness? It does not, at least not by itself and not completely. At best, the strongly correlated electrons would provide a mechanism for sharing state information from the thousands of interacting neurons in the SNc, and this would “somehow” be related to consciousness. But unlike other quantum consciousness “theories,” evidence of the close relationship between cognitive processing and conscious action selection and this hypothesized neural signaling mechanism already exists, and rests on solid neurobiology and cognitive science research.
When Parkinson’s disease causes the neurons of the SNc to fail, the ability to initiate and control voluntary action is slowly and painfully lost. Parkinson’s disease also damages the neurons of the locus coeruleus (LC), resulting in a corresponding loss of cognitive functions. These relatively small groups of neurons are known as “catecholaminergic” neurons, because they produce the catecholamines dopamine and noradrenaline. The damage caused by Parkinson’s disease is most significant in those neurons, unlike Alzheimer’s disease that primarily affects cortical neurons. Quantum consciousness “theories” that rest on widespread entanglement in structures found in all cells of the brain and the body fail to explain why the damage to the SNc and LC should result in loss of cognitive function and conscious action selection, whereas the catecholaminergic neuron electron transport (or CNET) signaling hypothesis provides an explanation. In addition, CNET is consistent with decades of earlier experimental observations. But CNET is not a quantum consciousness “theory” — it is a neural correlate of consciousness, a neural signaling hypothesis that provides a link between quantum biology and consciousness in a way that the baroque quantum consciousness “theories” do not.
While more work needs to be done to understand electron tunneling associated with ferritin in biological processes, one thing is clear — if it is present, electron tunneling associated with ferritin would occur all over the body but would only be involved with consciousness in very specific neural nuclei. It would not be the quantum entanglement of electrons (and possibly other particles) that causes consciousness, but rather the use of quantum entanglement as a medium over which information can be integrated from cognitive processing in neurons from all over the brain that interact with the SNc, the LC and possibly other specific groups of neurons that cause consciousness. Thus, CNET rests on solid neurobiology and cognitive science, and should be investigated by scientists who work in those fields. It may even eventually lead to a quantum consciousness “theory” with meaningful predictive power.
Chris Rourk is a recovering research scientist who now works as a patent attorney and conducts research in his spare time into the quantum biological processes that utilize electron tunneling associated with ferritin. He is the first person to obtain evidence of the presence of that quantum biological mechanism in biological tissue. He can be contacted at crourk@jw.com.
