Do You Need a Quantum Computer to Achieve
Machine Consciousness?
By Christof Koch
First Published June 2008
This is part of IEEE Spectrum's SPECIAL
REPORT: THE SINGULARITY
PHOTO: Caltech
|
The role of the conscious observer has been hotly
debated since the inception of quantum mechanics in the
1920s. More recently, the Oxford University cosmologist
Roger Penrose has surmised that a yet-to-be-discovered
quantum theory of gravity lies at the core of
consciousness. There are no principled reasons why
macroscopic quantum effects, such as entanglement, could
not have been selected for by natural selection to
subserve brain functions. If that is true, you would not
be able to upload your consciousness into a classical
machine. It would have to be a machine that exploited
quantum entanglement at the level of its elementary
gates. You'd need, in other words, a quantum computer,
with the processing and memory capacity of a human
brain. Indeed, the University of Arizona
anesthesiologist Stuart Hameroff has popularized the
notion that microtubules—proteins that form the
cytoskeleton of all cells, including neurons—implement
quantum gates that underlie consciousness.
However, there is no compelling evidence that brains
exploit any of the special features of quantum
mechanics. The components of the nervous system—a warm,
wet tissue strongly coupled to its environment—would
make it very difficult to retain entangled states, or
qubits, over the necessary spatial-temporal dimensions.
It is likely that to simulate or emulate brain-based
functions, including consciousness, computers built out
of classical, nonquantum gates will suffice.
For more articles,
videos, and special features, go to The
Singularity Special Report