Collapse, Not Computation · source record · paper

Reply to Comment on: 'Experimental indications of non-classical brain function' (2022 Journal of Physics Communications 6 105001)

Christian Kerskens; David López Pérez · 2023

AI-verified citationSRC-KERSKENS-2023

identifier / locator: doi:10.1088/2399-6528/acc636
url: https://doi.org/10.1088/2399-6528/acc636
verification note: text retrieved and shown to the drafter on 2026-09-11 (run 2026-09-11-draft-orch-or-115454); passages checked by the verify verb
reliability notes: Open-access reply in Journal of Physics Communications 7, 038002; publisher HTML read in full (no page numbers).
Authors' own defence of their protocol; the quantitative bound they cite is a recalculation from the standard iZQC expression, not a new measurement.
Completes the ORCH-C026 exchange alongside SRC-KERSKENS-2022 and SRC-WARREN-2023.

Evidence drawn from this source

Supports· moderateORCH-E087

what the source states: For the authors' own sequence parameters at TE = 5 ms, "the maximum signal could reach 0.4% of the initial magnetization".
what we infer: This completes the ORCH-C026 exchange, which the ledger held as comment-without-reply. It is the authors' own defence and a recalculation rather than a new measurement, so it does not resolve whether an unrecognized classical mechanism in living tissue could produce the signal — which the authors themselves name as the interesting open question.
limitations: Authors' own reply; not independent adjudication.
The classical bound relies on models derived for chemical solutions, as the authors acknowledge.
Does not establish entanglement, only that the signals exceed the modelled classical bound.

Supports· moderateORCH-E088

what the source states: If relaxation is included, the classical bound falls further: "the reduction will be down to 0.13%, which is the best-case scenario without any saturation".
what we infer: This completes the ORCH-C026 exchange, which the ledger held as comment-without-reply. It is the authors' own defence and a recalculation rather than a new measurement, so it does not resolve whether an unrecognized classical mechanism in living tissue could produce the signal — which the authors themselves name as the interesting open question.
limitations: Authors' own reply; not independent adjudication.
The classical bound relies on models derived for chemical solutions, as the authors acknowledge.
Does not establish entanglement, only that the signals exceed the modelled classical bound.

Supports· moderateORCH-E089

what the source states: From these recomputed bounds the authors conclude: "It is now clear that we have not measured iZQC".
what we infer: This completes the ORCH-C026 exchange, which the ledger held as comment-without-reply. It is the authors' own defence and a recalculation rather than a new measurement, so it does not resolve whether an unrecognized classical mechanism in living tissue could produce the signal — which the authors themselves name as the interesting open question.
limitations: Authors' own reply; not independent adjudication.
The classical bound relies on models derived for chemical solutions, as the authors acknowledge.
Does not establish entanglement, only that the signals exceed the modelled classical bound.

Supports· moderateORCH-E090

what the source states: The correlation distance predicted for ZQC "played no role" when the gradient moments were varied "from 32.5 ms mT m −1 to around 80 ms mT m −1".
what we infer: This completes the ORCH-C026 exchange, which the ledger held as comment-without-reply. It is the authors' own defence and a recalculation rather than a new measurement, so it does not resolve whether an unrecognized classical mechanism in living tissue could produce the signal — which the authors themselves name as the interesting open question.
limitations: Authors' own reply; not independent adjudication.
The classical bound relies on models derived for chemical solutions, as the authors acknowledge.
Does not establish entanglement, only that the signals exceed the modelled classical bound.