I have found the interview with Stuart Hameroff by googling

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2911199841702354668

Do you mean something like this?

I am not sure that I find Hameroff's ideas impressive. I am personally closer to Mike's agnosticism:

"What the WORLD is, if it exists (what does that mean?) what we call a "universe" or "existence" is hazy. No outside view.".

I like a lot the reporter though, he is good, if the reporter had a book, I would love to read it. As for the speaker, it would be an interesting project for a psychologist to research what Hameroff himself thinks about his statements and why. Some sort of physcoanalysis that relates the viewpoints of the speaker to his infancy and childhood would be good.

I believe that Bruno's statement

"But theology is a science, like biology, zoology, physics, etc. By abandoning theology to the authoritative church, not only we have lost the most fundamental science, but we have erect automatically another science, physics, into a pseudo-theology, that is a science which acts as a theology without saying."

would be also suitable here.


On 30.04.2011 02:47 zprime21 said the following:
try stuart hammeroff and roger penrose collaboration....regarding
conciousness.

On Apr 27, 12:16 pm, Evgenii Rudnyi<use...@rudnyi.ru>  wrote:
Recently I have seen interpretation of quantum mechanics in terms
of quantum decoherence, for example Decoherence and the Transition
from Quantum to Classical by Wojciech H. Zurek. What is an attitude
in general to this? Is this good? Is there a good text for a layman
about such an approach?

Evgenii


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to