Quantum physics had a pretty massive impact in making microelectronics possible, which certainly affected society. However it is just as magical to most, and I don’t think it had much of a direct impact at all.
A careful analysis of this question yields the answer. The question correctly implies that we “realize” (i.e.- science shows us) that life and intelligence are the result of physical processes and not magic, but that a certain segment of the population refuses to “accept” this. So we have some of the population living in a state of denial and cognitive dissonance, and another segment simply living in ignorance.
So what happens when both simple ignorance and willful ignorance are superseded by rational scientific knowledge, and we no longer attribute important aspects of our lives to magic and mysticism? What happens when we recognize factual knowledge not as an option that can be denied, but as an imperative of enlightened rationality? One can only surmise that it results in a more rational, better world.
I don’t see it diminishing our basic humanness, because I think we would be more inclined to act in the service of humanity rather than in the service of a magical being alleged to have some very peculiar viewpoints on certain aspects of morality, peculiar viewpoints comprising a strange mix of wisdom, fairy tales of magic and superstition guaranteed to be true, and a good deal of intolerance, injustice, and violence strangely aligned with ancient cultures and archaic barbarism.
I also don’t see it as diminishing our humanness for the simple reason that understanding how the universe works doesn’t diminish its wonders, it enhances our appreciation for them. Understanding how biology works, or how wondrous and delicate the human body is, doesn’t diminish our qualities of empathy, caring, and love. Science doesn’t diminish spirituality, it just keeps it rational. It’s OK to believe that empathy and caring for others is an important moral foundation that makes you a better person. It’s not OK to believe that you must do so because if you don’t, God will smite you, or to be a hateful religious warrior in the service of an imaginary mystical being.
Life doesn’t need to be actually magical, to be special.
No one’s mentioned Penrose’s view, that quantum mechanics are somehow key to consciousness. It is certainly true that quantum effects are key to many biological processes. Unlike (I think!) the quantum effects needed for transistor operation, some biological processes actually employ the superposition associated with qubit computers.
Photosynthesis may be the best-known example of facilitation by spooky quantum effects, but there are other examples. Penrose has now joined with a quantum biologist to hypothesize that microtubules within neurons play the role of qubits.
These are not matters on which I’m qualified to comment; and even if we stipulate that the microtubule=qubit hypothesis (or something similar) is correct I wouldn’t speculate on its connection to the thread topic. However I think such opinions should be placed on record in this thread.
Well, it is so far unlikely.
And then I look at the ones that have been investigating AI by looking at biology and technology at the same time like Jeff Hawkins has; as he can tell you that, so far, there is no need to use that quantum hypothesis as what has been found so far is explained by known electrical and chemistry signals and the arrangement and the properties of neurons and the layers they are a part of in the brain.
http://numenta.com/press/numenta-researchers-discover-how-the-brain-learns-sequences.html
Given how brutally hard they’re finding it, right now, to get eight qubits working together, I really have to doubt that the human brain is somehow harnessing billions of them.
Neurons are impressive enough without needing to make up extra properties for them. Penrose is a mathematical genius – and damn good at physics too – and I’m not worthy to lace up his boots…but, on the other hand, renowned scientists do have an historical tendency to develop idees fixee, and I think Penrose is an example of this.
GIGObuster, do you preface many of your Google searches with “How to debunk” or such phrase? Without hijacking this thread, I do recall one where it was very obvious you did something like that to generate the response you made.
You are likely correct, but don’t forget that quantum computer researchers first thought the claim that photosynthesis used similar superposition principles to be hilariously ignorant, but soon became strong supporters of the idea. Researchers into solar power are now trying to adapt similar “magic.”
The answer to your question is no.
Usually what happens is that I’m aware of what many researchers are doing in the field of artificial intelligence, and while the quantum effect is likely to be used in future computers, the effect has not been needed to explain intelligence or consciousness by many. In any case one should deal with what has been found and what the experts are saying about Penrose, trying to ignore it just because you think I point at the criticism out of spite is only justifying the “beautiful theory” while ignoring the ugly facts.
Scientific method says we should always presume the coolest explanation first. Hypothesis through observation and analysis is a really boring approach.
Partially right, I do remember how Feynman put it: first you guess it (I noted that it does not have to be a cool explanation), then you make experiments to demonstrate it, if the experiments do not match the theory, then it is wrong. It doesn’t matter how beautiful the theory is, if it doesn’t match observations then it is wrong.
And in this issue I did remember how the progress has been going, quantum effects have not been needed to see progress or to understand what has been observed so far, of course the approach of groups like Numenta concentrate in artificial intelligence and they can tell you that consciousness is not their goal, but figuring how the brain works will lead to understanding consciousness too.
The point of all that was to note that the idea of quantum mechanics applied to consciousness has no clear mechanism for it to work in the brain; the other ugly fact was that the quantum effect has so far not been needed to explain the progress and evidence found so far.
And then I have to note that there is a very cool theory of the brain guiding what AI people like Numenta are doing. Unlike other ideas proposed there are already independent papers and experiments showing that theirs is a good idea and they have already products using the theory and IBM has knocked on their door AFAIK. Just saying that IMHO it is more cool to check what ideas and theories are working and dumping or putting on ice 
for the time being the ideas that are not making much headway.