From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!uunet!psinntp!scylla!daryl Wed Feb 26 12:53:36 EST 1992
Article 3924 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!uunet!psinntp!scylla!daryl
>From: daryl@oracorp.com
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Wanted: Critique of Emperor's New Mind
Message-ID: <1992Feb21.174255.5978@oracorp.com>
Date: 21 Feb 92 17:42:55 GMT
Organization: ORA Corporation
Lines: 22

Matthew P Wiener writes (in response to ICE)

>>It is an interesting book with many fascinating explorations, but
>>to make the claim that human neurons are subject to the uncertainty
>>of quantum physics (which the author, Penrose is a leader in) is an
>>attempt to overstep authority which is unbecoming.

>How so?  Everything is subject to quantum uncertainty.

>If you have an actual criticism, state it.

The original poster asked for published critiques of The Emperor's New
Mind, not for the opinions of Net people. As far as criticism in this
newsgroup, there was a long discussion on this topic a few months ago
that has only petered out recently. I agree with you that Penrose'
claim that brains are affected by quantum mechanics is *not* a problem
with Penrose' book (although there are plenty of other problems, in my
opinion).

Daryl McCullough
ORA Corp.
Ithaca, NY


