Maaneli Derakhshani, Lajos Diósi, Matthias Laubenstein, Kristian Piscicchia and Catalina Curceanu (2022), Physics of Life Reviews 42:8–14 — DOI-10.1016/j.plrev.2022.05.004
Key takeaways
Registered from the abstract, the author keywords and Crossref’s reference list, not a reading. What follows is what those sources say.
- The abstract, in full: “In this paper we perform a critical analysis of the Orch OR consciousness theory at the crossroad with the newest experimental results coming from the search for spontaneous radiation predicted by the simplest version of gravity-related dynamical collapse models. We conclude that Orch OR theory, when based on the simplest version of gravity-related dynamical collapse, is highly implausible in all the cases analyzed. We discuss the implications of our findings, the limitations, and future plans toward the development of more realistic gravity-related collapse models.”
- The scope is conditional, by the abstract’s own wording: the verdict is on Orch OR “when based on the simplest version” of gravity-related collapse, and the authors look toward “more realistic” collapse models.
- The experimental input is not named in the abstract. Its keywords name a germanium detector, and Crossref’s 22-entry reference list includes Donadi et al., Underground test of gravity-related wave function collapse (Nature Physics, DOI-10.1038/s41567-020-1008-4), which I take, unread, to be the bound used.
Standing in the record
Filed on 2026-10-03 at the owner’s request, with Babcock et al. (LIT-645), as one of two pieces of evidence bearing on Orch OR. No anthology topic holds a theory of consciousness or a collapse model, and the paper carries no instruction for machine-learning practice.
Deferred because it was not read: no lawful full text was within reach
(see the status note). What can be said without reading it is limited to
what it is evidence of, as its abstract frames it.
- What it would show. An experimental argument against one specific variant: Orch OR joined to the simplest gravity-related collapse model, judged against searches for the spontaneous radiation that model predicts.
- What it would not show. It does not test the “Orch” half of the theory, that consciousness depends on orchestrated collapses in microtubules, and it does not test collapse models that radiate less. Its own abstract reserves “more realistic gravity-related collapse models”.
- The published dispute, at second hand. McQueen’s open-access comment, Have underground radiation measurements refuted the Orch OR theory? (ARXIV-2301.12306, Physics of Life Reviews 44:201–203, 2023), agrees that the variant is refuted. It argues that no one advocated that variant and that it contradicts Hameroff and Penrose’s own views, so the result cuts out “a small class of possible variants”. I read McQueen’s abstract only, and the record does not hold his comment.
How it sits against Babcock et al. (LIT-645): that paper measures collective quantum optical states in microtubules and says nothing about collapse; this one bounds collapse and says nothing about microtubule physics. Neither confirms or refutes the other, and no relation is declared.
Elsewhere in the record, Gao (LIT-121, read in NOTE-140) criticises Penrose’s gravity-collapse argument on theoretical grounds and asks whether collapse models survive “current collapse-model bounds (e.g. X-ray spontaneous-emission tests)”. This paper is a source for exactly that kind of bound. Chalmers (LIT-406, NOTE-336) dismisses quantum theories of consciousness on the different ground that they explain functions at best.
Priority for a reading: medium. It is short (seven pages). A reading should check which collapse-model parameters the radiation data bound, for which microtubule or tubulin scenarios “implausible” was computed, and whether any scenario survived.
Access when seeded:
- Crossref record for the DOI (authors without affiliations, 22 references, PII S1571064522000197).
- Unpaywall (is_oa false, closed), OpenAlex (closed, no repository full text), Europe PMC (in PubMed only, no PMC copy), Semantic Scholar (no open PDF).
- arXiv API searches by title words, by “Orch OR” in abstracts, and by Derakhshani with Curceanu and by Piscicchia: no preprint.
- Diósi’s publication list (wigner.hu/~diosi/pub.html), entry [123]: the DOI only.
- ScienceDirect: HTTP 403 with a captcha page. CORE: a redirect challenge. Neither was pursued.