Quick Navigation

Topics

Entanglement Theory Quantum Correlations Quantum Chemistry

Anesthesia, consciousness and hydrophobic pockets--a unitary quantum hypothesis of anesthetic action.

PubMed
Authors: Hameroff S

Year

1998

Paper ID

13471

Status

Peer-reviewed

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

106

Citations

62

Abstract

1. A consensus view holds that anesthetics act by van der Waals forces in hydrophobic pockets of select brain proteins to ablate consciousness. 2. What is consciousness? Enigmatic features of consciousness (e.g. 'qualia', binding, non-computability, pre-conscious-->conscious transition, nondeterministic free will) may be explained by the occurrence of quantum coherent states in the brain. 3. Van der Waals electron pair couplings (London forces) in hydrophobic pockets in non-anesthetic (conscious) conditions are a particular type of quantum capable of supporting macroscopic quantum coherence. 4. The mechanism of anesthetics may be to inhibit electron mobility and London forces necessary for quantum states and consciousness in hydrophobic pockets of select brain proteins.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Quantum Chemistry research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 1998 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • 1.

Paper Tools

Become a member to use research tools

Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.

Publisher Share Cite This Paper Copy URL Compare Copy DOI Add to Reading List Category Correction Request

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #13471 #78837 TLS loss in superconducting res... #78797 Local polarization control of o... #78792 Demonstration of subspace-searc...

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal • updated 2026-10-22 01:41:20

Community Reactions

Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.

Score: 0
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0

Sign in to react to this paper.

Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)

Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)

No written reviews yet.