On 18 August 2014 11:49, spudboy100 via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> It got pretty heated when Teg questioned Hameroff back in the day. OK, I didn't know that. > Teg was correct in an absolute sense that its far to warm inside the skull > to.present a quantum computation. But a quantum computation as a result of > a quantum field effect seems to be a different story. How a quant field > relates to an actual quantum computer is apparently different. Yet > biologists for thqt last decade, have increasingly observed quant processes > occuring in, for example, plants. This is where teggers, was too > pessimistic, since he was looking for cold superconductivity, as a > necessity for quantum computation, but quantum fields are related, but, > different then qc. A bigger question I have is can we compute using quant > field effect, or, more weirldly, do quantum fields compute, naturally, > automatically? > > Yeah, I was thinking of photosynthesis and suchlike (that's why I heavily qualified my comment with remarks about "stuff we haven't discovered yet".) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
