Broc Dobervich
7 posts




Thanks Eric We almost met once. Roger Penrose tried to introduce us but you looked away dismissively. You haven’t changed. You didn’t respond to my criticisms of your positions which I conclude to mean you have no viable responses. Without consciousness you have a theory of nothing. Meanwhile the 30 year old Penrose-Hameroff Orch OR theory of consciousness has more explanatory power, biological connection and experimental validation than all other theories combined. academic.oup.com/nc/article/202…

Color exists in consciousness which exists in physics (unless it’s foolishly ignored). You don’t have the proper physics nor a ‘theory of everything’ that includes consciousness. Only Roger Penrose does, and it’s described in our Orch OR theory based on brain microtubules. Penrose OR also solves the measurement problem in quantum mechanics. If your theory of everything doesn’t include consciousness, how useful could it possibly be? pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24070914/

Agree on constraint structures, that’s the key shift. The open question is whether microtubules generate the coupling, or realise deeper constraints that already define which coordination patterns are stable. Across neuroscience, abstraction maps to stable attractor states in coupled systems. That suggests the governing structure sits at the level of the constraint space that defines the attractor landscape, not any single substrate. Any viable mechanism then has to explain how only specific modes stabilise out of many possibilities, not just how signals propagate within a given structure. Microtubules may act as waveguides within that space, but the selection of stable modes appears to be more general than the biology that implements them.


«We aren’t merely equipped to hear music—we’re hardwired to crave it.»


