Microtubules, coherence, consciousness

Date: Fri, 9 Feb 1996 08:23:48 -0800
From: Stuart Hameroff <srh@ccit.arizona.edu>
To: quantum-d list <quantum-d@teleport.com>
Subject: Microtubules, coherence, consciousness

Here is a note i am reposting with Stuart Hameroff's permission that he
sent to psyche-d in the spring of 1995. This seems as good a time as any
to plunge into the deep end of the subject of microtubules - ubiquitous
internetworked sub-cellular structures whose intricate state changes may
be computational, and which some evidence suggests might play a deep and
possibly quantum coherent role underlying consciousness.

In this note Stuart Hameroff begins innocently by mentioning possible
advantages of a model of the brain encompassing quantum coherence, and
then proposes the microtubules as a likely locus for quantum effects...

The remaining paragraphs describe a more specialized idea, more or less
the weird cutting edge of speculation about microtubules, consciousness,
and quantum mechanics: what Stuart refers to as "orchestrated objective
reduction." This idea is that networks of microtubules might manage the
details of their own quantum superposition and 'collapse,' opening a way
towards transcomputability and even free-will. This depends on a physics
of wavefunction collapse which does not exist in a precise form. Stuart
Hameroff is using Penrose physics, where a relation of reduction time to
energy density

                 t=h-bar/E        [eqn. 1]

allows the calculation of wavefunction reduction thresholds - a partial
explanation of this is given in pages 335-347 of Penrose's _Shadows of
the Mind_.

Using this reduction relation, Penrose and Hameroff have investigated the
requirements of auto-collapse by tubulin and found generally appropriate
biological orders of magnitude.

What is described below is both 1) microtubule latticies as the sites of
quantum coherence in the brain, and also 2) an expansion of our physics
which includes [eqn. 1] and allows for auto-collapse, transcomputability
and possibly the control of individual quantum outcomes.

Further discussion can be found in Penrose's _Beyond the Doubting of a
Shadow_ at the Psyche web site: http://psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/

Rhett

-------------------->
                                            Date:   Mon, 15 May 1995
                                            From:   Stuart Hameroff
                                              To:   PSYCHE-D

In addition to the Goedel/noncomputability issues, there are other
puzzling features of consciousness for which quantum theory offers
possible explanations: binding/unitary sense, transition from
pre-conscious  processing to consciousness, simultaneity and flow of
time, non-determinism, and Chalmers' (1994; 1996) "hard problem" of
what exactly consciousness IS -  the subjective nature of experience.

Stan Klein claims that for quantum theory to be relevant to
consciousness "what is needed for the brain are superpositions of a
neuron firing |F> AND a neuron not firing |NF>". And indeed, the notion
of all-or-none, membrane mediated neural firing being the ONLY
significant level of information signaling and processing in the brain
IS the accepted conventional wisdom in cognitive science, neuroscience
and philosophy. Each neuron, however, is so incredibly complex that
this notion should be recognized as a gross oversimplification, if not
delusion. Future developments in technology will bear this out.

So the relevance of quantum theory to consciousness may be at a more
fundamental level: but where? Perhaps at the level of ordered water
throughout the cell, layered at surfaces of membranes, organelles, and
in particular the cytoskeleton (Jibu et al, 1994; and references
therein). Or perhaps at the level of proteins, the most versatile and
intelligent of biomolecules. Michael Conrad (1992; 1994) for example,
describes quantum coherence among dipoles and hydrogen bonds throughout
each protein coupled to its conformation (and thereby function).
Frohlich's (1968; 1970; 1975) model predicts that assemblies of
proteins may be bioenergetically pumped into quantum coherence (akin to
a Bose-Einstein condensate, as Scott Hagan has explained; cf. Marshall,
1989).

The point is that if quantum theory is relevant to consciousness,  it
is superposition at a level of biostructures much smaller than neurons
that are important. Superpositions at the level of proteins and
surrounding water, in which the protein conformational shape and
associated function are coupled to quantum events, are the most likely
to be relevant. For example in the case of a protein capable of
switching between two different conformational states A and B, there
may also be a superposed quantum state of both A AND B. After a time T,
the protein will "reduce" to either A or B. If such proteins are
configured in a lattice so that coherence occurs among the superposed
states, "quantum computing" (e.g. Benioff,1982; Deutsch and Josza,1992;
Feynman, 1986) may occur whose outputs regulate neural firing. Issues
of isolation and bioenergetics required for biomolecular quantum
coherence are tricky, but feasible. (Frohlich coherence is the subject
of a weeklong conference in Prague, September 11-15, 1995.)

Microtubules, geometric lattices of proteins, seem particularly suited
for such a role. They have the following characteristics:  1) high
prevalence, 2) functional importance (for example regulating neural
connectivity and synaptic function), 3) periodic, crystal-like lattice
dipole structure with long-range order, 4) ability to be transiently
isolated from external interaction/observation, 5) functionally coupled
to quantum-level events, 6) hollow, cylindrical (possible waveguide),
and 7) suitable for information processing. Membranes, membrane
proteins, synapses, DNA and other types of structures have some, but
not all, of these characteristics.  Cytoskeletal microtubules are the
most likely (but not necessarily the only) biomolecular quantum devices
in neurons.

Roger Penrose and I have completed two recent papers (Hameroff and
Penrose, 1996a; 1996b) which describe "orchestrated objective reduction
(Orch OR)" of quantum coherence in microtubules as a formal model of
consciousness. A brief summary follows:

We envisage that conformational states of microtubule subunits
(tubulins) are coupled to internal quantum events (dipoles,
delocalizable electrons in hydrophobic pockets, hydrogen bonds), and
cooperatively interact (compute) with other tubulins. We further assume
that macroscopic coherent superposition of quantum-coupled tubulin
conformational states occurs throughout significant brain volumes (for
example by a Frohlich type Bose-Einstein condensate, and/or quantum
optical coherence as described by Jibu , Yasue, Hagan et al,1994; etc)
and provides the global binding essential to consciousness.

We equate the emergence and quantum computing phase of microtubule
quantum coherence with pre-conscious processing which grows (for up to
500 milliseconds - Libet et al, 1979) until the mass-energy difference
among the separated states of tubulins reaches a threshold related to
quantum gravity.  At that point, self-collapse, or "objective
reduction" ("OR" - Penrose, 1994) occurs. We thus relate consciousness
to the (self) collapse process itself (in agreement, for example, with
Stapp, 1993). Cascades of self-collapses give rise to the "stream" of
consciousness, and provide a "flow" of time.

According to the arguments for OR put forth in Penrose (1994),
superposed states each have their own space-time geometries (see
Shadows of the Mind, p. 338). When the degree of coherent mass-energy
difference leads to sufficient separation of space-time geometry, the
system must choose and decay (reduce, collapse) to a single universe
state [avoiding the need for multiple universes as discussed by, for
example, Everett (1957) and Wheeler (1957)]. In this way, a transient
superposition of slightly differing space-time geometries persists
until an abrupt quantum to classical reduction occurs. If as various
philosophers claim (cf. Chalmers, 1994; 1996) the nature of conscious
experience is somehow embedded in the nature of reality,
self-selections in fundamental space-time geometry may address the
"hard problem" of consciousness.

Unlike the random, "subjective reduction" (SR, or R) of standard
quantum theory caused by observation or environmental entanglement, the
OR we propose in microtubules is a self-collapse and it results in
particular patterns of microtubule-tubulin conformational ("eigen-")
states that regulate neuronal activities including synaptic functions.
Possibilities and probabilities for post-reduction tubulin states are
influenced by factors including attachments of microtubule-associated
proteins (MAPs) acting as "nodes" which tune and "orchestrate" the
quantum oscillations. We thus term the particular self-tuning OR
process in microtubules "orchestrated objective reduction" ("Orch OR"),
and calculate an estimate for the number of tubulins (and neurons)
whose coherence for relevant time periods (e.g. 500 milliseconds) will
elicit Orch OR. We calculate an estimate of 10^9 tubulins, equivalent
to a range of from hundreds to ten thousand neurons, as the number
required for a 500 msec conscious event. A "more intense" conscious
event, for example one which emerges in only 50 msec, would require
10^10 tubulins. Any Orch OR  would "bind" varying time scale processes,
so that a particular conscious event can include various contents
emerging over differing time scales (for example responding to an
immediate situation, and recalling an overdue bill).

In providing a connection among 1) pre-conscious to conscious
transition, 2) fundamental space-time notions (thus potentially
addressing the "hard problem"), 3) non-computability, 4) non-
determinism, and 5) binding of various (time scale and spatial)
reductions into an instantaneous event ("conscious now"), we believe
Orch OR in brain microtubules is the most specific and plausible model
for consciousness yet proposed.


Stuart Hameroff

in collaboration with Roger Penrose


References

Benioff, P. (1982) Quantum mechanical Hamiltonian models of Turing
Machines. J. Stat. Phys. 29:515- 546.

Chalmers, D. (1996) Facing up to the problem of consiousness. In:
Toward a Science of Consciousness -  Contributions from the 1994 Tucson
Conference, S.R. Hameroff, A. Kaszniak and A.C. Scott (eds.), MIT
Press, Cambridge, MA.

Chalmers, D. (1996) Toward a Theory of Consciousness. MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA.

Conrad, M. (1992)  Quantum molecular computing: the self-assembly
model. Int. J. Quant. Chem.: Quantum Biology Symp.  19: 125-143.

Conrad, M. (1994)  Amplification of superpositional effects through
electronic-conformational interactions. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals  4:
423-438.

Deutsch, D. (1985) Quantum theory, the Church- Turing principle and the
universal quantum computer. Proc. Royal Soc. (London) A400:97-117.

Deutsch, D., and Josza, R. (1992) Rapid solution of problems by quantum
computation. Proc. Royal Soc. (London) A439:553-556.

Everett, H., (1957) Relative state formulation of quantum mechanics. In
Quantum Theory and Measurement, J.A. Wheeler and W.H. Zurek (eds.)
Princeton University Press, 1983; originally in Rev. Mod. Physics,
29:454-462.

Feynman, R.P. (1986) Quantum mechanical computers. Foundations of
Physics 16(6):507-531.

Frohlich, H. (1968) Long-range coherence and energy storage in
biological systems. Int. J. Quantum Chem. 2:641-9.

Frohlich, H. (1970) Long range coherence and the actions of enzymes.
Nature 228:1093.

Frohlich, H. (1975) The extraordinary dielectric properties of
biological materials and the action of enzymes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
72:4211-4215.

Hameroff, S.R. (1994) Quantum coherence in microtubules: A neural basis
for emergent consciousness?  Journal of Consciousness Studies
1(1):91-118.

Hameroff, S.R., and Penrose, R. (1996) Orchestrated reduction of
quantum coherence in brain microtubules: A model for consciousness. In:
Toward a Science of Consciousness -  Contributions from the 1994 Tucson
Conference, S.R. Hameroff, A. Kaszniak and A.C. Scott (eds.), MIT
Press, Cambridge, MA.

Hameroff, S. R., and Penrose, R. (1996) Conscious events as
orchestrated space-time selections (submitted)

Jibu, M., Hagan, S., Hameroff, S.R., Pribram, K.H., and Yasue, K.
(1994) Quantum optical coherence in cytoskeletal microtubules:
implications for brain function. BioSystems 32:195-209.

Libet, B., Wright, E.W. Jr., Feinstein, B., and Pearl, D.K. (1979)
Subjective referral of the timing for a conscious sensory experience.
Brain 102:193-224.

Marshall, I.N. (1989) Consciousness and Bose- Einstein condensates. New
Ideas in Psychology 7:73 83.

Penrose, R. (1989) The Emperor's New Mind, Oxford Press, Oxford.

Penrose, R. (1994) Shadows of the Mind, Oxford Press, London.

Stapp, H.P. (1993) Mind, Matter and Quantum Mechanics, Springer-Verlag

Wheeler, J.A. (1957) Assessment of Everett's `relative state"
formulation of quantum theory. Revs. Mod. Phys., 29:463-465.