| Although quantum mechanics has been around since the beginning of the 20th century, it is only in the last twenty or thirty years that it has begun to find practical applications in everyday life. And in the past twenty years in particular, those working on quantum mechanics and neuroscience have begun to take an interest in each others’ fields. First physicists took an interest in the nervous system, and later, not to be outdone, neuroscientists started to look at quantum physics. And despite there not being a suitable platform, conferences on quantum physics strangely became the scene for discussions on the concepts of consciousness, conscious measurement, and the observer. At neuroscience conferences, discussion started as to whether quantum physics had a place in the communication between nerve cells, and whether the description by classical physics only was insufficient to explain some of the workings of the brain. And after 2000, academic meetings attended by both neuroscientists and quantum physicists started to be held under the title of Quantum Mind. The speakers at these conferences were not New Age writers or amateurs who ascribe everything to quantum physics; most of them were leading physicists and neuroscientists. What they did and what they wrote was not outside objective scientific practice. NeuroQuantology (2001) is first and foremost a new scientific discipline, just like neuroanatomy (1895), neurobiology (1910), neuroendocrinology, neurochemistry (1920-25), neuropharmacology (1950), neurophilosophy (1989), and neurotheology (1994). Since 2003, neuroscience and quantum physics have been growing together by examining two main topics. One of these is the problem of measurement in quantum mechanics. The measurement problem has brought many other still unanswered questions in its train. In classical physics there is only an observer, but quantum mechanics has become embroiled in unending discussion about whether this person is an observer, a participant in the measurement, or even a reporter of the result of the measurement. There is increasing discussion in many articles on whether consciousness operates on measurement, and if it does, to what extent. The Copenhagen interpretation, which has been around since the beginning of quantum mechanics, while suggesting solutions to multiple worlds and the theory of hidden variables, has not been part of a clear answer to the question of what role the observer plays. Eugene Wigner, Ewan Walker, Jack Sarfatti and many other people have produced mathematical equations to show the role of consciousness in quantum mechanics, but so far there is no generally accepted approach. If a conscious observer really does have an effect on quantum measurements, many of our equations will have to be drastically changed. The other main topic of NeuroQuantology is quantum neurobiology: that is, the brain operates not only at a classical, macroscopic level, but also at a quantum, microscopic level. It covers the question of where this level begins and whether it has a bearing on our consciousness, mind, memory and decision-making processes. The first people to suggest that quantum mechanics could operate in biology, even though they were the godfathers of quantum mechanics (Niels Bohr, Erwin Schödinger, Walter Heitler, and Max Delbrück), now after 110 years have passed have been squeezed into quantum mechanics and the physics and chemistry of solid, dead matter. Thus, the biological structures that are taught from primary school are made up of physical and chemical structures. Incomprehensibly, there has been resistance for a century to quantum biology. NeuroQuantology provides the motivation to break down this resistance and open a new door to quantum neurobiology. |