This is what I always find weird about some areas of modern science is the completly inability to hold new ideas without an ability to abstract away the need for the direct evidence; if this encourages someone to find something that can be wholy described (rather than be called "spirital essence" as so many things previously were we now give names too).
Isn't this what most of science was built upon - Is he right or wrong? Sometimes a need for minds who can push ideas into scientific thinking.
If that wasn't the case, then we might not even have Quantum Physics as it is today...
Unlike medical cranks out there, Penrose has (far as I've seen) never said anything of this is definitive - only that there is the potential in his theory that Orch-OR is the likely seat of conciousness.
Isn't this what most of science was built upon - Is he right or wrong? Sometimes a need for minds who can push ideas into scientific thinking.
If that wasn't the case, then we might not even have Quantum Physics as it is today...
Unlike medical cranks out there, Penrose has (far as I've seen) never said anything of this is definitive - only that there is the potential in his theory that Orch-OR is the likely seat of conciousness.