Advocates of the highly speculative notion of "quantum biology" like to invoke the case of superconductivity as a "proof of principle" that macroscopic quantum effects can play a role in biology.
In 1994, Phil Anderson wrote a devastating critique of Roger Penrose's book Shadows of the Mind: A search for the missing science of consciousness. Anderson's review was entitled Shadows of Doubt, and contains the following relevant paragraph:
The review is also reprinted in More and Different. The preamble states the Penrose Fallacy: "all problems too difficult to be solved by the great brain of the author must be identical." (p. 186)
BTW: a review of the book by David Mermin just appeared in Physics Today.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Lecture on Debye model for solids
I just finished preparing my undergraduate lecture on the Debye model for solids. Here are my slides . The course is a third-year course on...
-
An interesting and controversial question for Ph.D's in science and engineering is too what extent students should be expected to have ...
-
This week Nobel Prizes will be announced. I have not done predictions since 2020 . This is a fun exercise. It is also good to reflect on w...
-
Is it something to do with breakdown of the Born-Oppenheimer approximation? In molecular spectroscopy you occasionally hear this term thro...


No comments:
Post a Comment