Macroscopic Quantum Coherence in Patient‐Practitioner‐Remedy Entanglement: The Quantized Fluctuation Field Perspective

Abstract

Lionel Milgrom’s article (1) has stirred up considerablecorrespondence (2), mostly due to misconceptions ofvarious kinds. Chrastina, for example (3), is quite wrongto attack Milgrom’s work over whether coherence inquantum systems can be maintained over macroscopicdistances at high temperatures. All quantum field theoriesin solid state physics provide examples where this kindof assumption is made at a primal level, since the lowenergy forms of their various quanta are assumed toextend over the whole lattice being considered. Theoret-ically that is infinite in thermodynamic systems, and,practically, over a whole crystal, or whatever kind ofdomain is appropriate to the exciton under consideration,be it phonon, electron, magnon or other. The Mossbauereffect (4) provides a fine example of how a macroscopicsystem can undergo a quantum interaction as a coherentwhole at whatever temperature it may happen to finditself.In the case of conscious systems, macroscopic quantumcoherence as a fundamental requirement was firsthypothesized by Domash (5) working in close conjunc-tion with Maharishi Mahesh Yogi in the 1970s. The twoused it to make highly successful predictions about brainstates in higher states of consciousness (6), which havebeen greatly extended over the years (7,8). Their workhas been taken up and championed by Penrose (9), whoalso insists that macroscopic quantum coherence has tobe a major factor in allowing the brain to maintainconscious awareness (10, p.133) of non-computationalkinds he has so brilliantly established. Penrose alsorecognizes that such brain states must be inherentlyweakly interacting so that coherence can be maintained(10, p.134).