this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2025
592 points (98.5% liked)

Science Memes

14430 readers
331 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

i know we don't have that technology right now. i see it as very plausible in the future.

It’s entirely possible that consciousness is non-computable.

thats a hell of an assumption, is thinking the same as consciousness? how would consciousness be non-computable, if our brains are composed of discrete computation units (the neurons)? granted they are very different from computers, but i can see it being emulatable with enough processing power to account for all the variables.

we don't know for a fact only fleshy brains composed of neurons are somehow capable of experiencing it. do we know what consciousness even is?

is that even how we define "thinking" too? why would a theoretical future ai that could theoretically have a logic process like ours not be considered "thinking"?

[–] AppleTea@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Yes, it's an assumption to say consciousness is non-computable. But it's also an assumption to say it is computable. Not really a phenomenon we understand.

I agree that fleshy brains are probably not the only things capable of producing consciousness. I think it's actually fairly likely that a machine could be made that reproduces it, I'm just... really skeptical that it's gonna look anything like a Turing machine. It would certainly be convenient if it did.

As to brains being made of discrete units... there's some evidence to suggest it might not be. When you put a person (or any living thing) under general anesthetics, the thing the anesthetics target is microtubules within cells. And microtubules themselves have quantum mechanical properties. They've been shown to er, "do", super-luminescence in lab experiments (I don't understand quantum).

Admittedly, that's a lot of correlation and almost no direct example of causation. But it does suggest there's... something... there that needs more examination and research.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

yeah you are right. but "we don't actually know" doesnt make for a fun thought experiment.

i think if we ever figure out a way to emulate a brain, theres no reason it shouldnt look like a turing machine, if thats even possible at all.

id love to see that evidence if you have it. its a subject im interested in.

[–] AppleTea@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 week ago

Here's the super luminescence research paper https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.01469

although, this PBS youtube video is the summary I actually understand