Can you solve a system of coupled Schröedinger equations and know what my wife will want for dinner? I’m only partially joking of course. What I mean is that physics conveniently formalizes what is most conveniently formalized, thus giving an impression of all-encompassing knowledge and predictive ability, when in fact it’s only a small fraction of what is. And I’m saying this as a PhD in chemistry.
Do you believe consciousness doesn't fall under the laws of physics or are you saying the laws of physics as currently known don't yet go far enough to explain the working of consciousness? You probably know Roger Penrose and Douglas Hofstadter have been going round and round on this issue, in a good-natured manner, for decades now. Penrose is convinced QM is required to explain consciousness, whereas Hofstadter maintains consciousness can be modeled with mathematics. It really boils down to can you create an AI that's conscious (which Hofstadter believes) or do you need a physical structure like the brain (which Penrose believes). Neither one is arguing though that consciousness isn't subject to the laws of physics, one just believes the laws of physics as currently known are insufficient to explain consciousness. That appears to be the camp you're in?
