There are three broad kinds of experiments that one can devise to test hypotheses involving the relevance of quantum effects to the phenomenon of conscious ness. The three kinds address three different scale ranges associated roughly with tissue-to-cell (1cm-10 μ m), cell-to- protein (10 μ m-10nm) and protein-to-atom (10nm-1Å) sizes. Note that we are excluding experiments that aim to detect quantum effects at the “whole hum an” or even “society” level as these have consistently given either negative results or been plagued by irreproducibility and bad science (e.g. the various extra sensory perception and remote viewing experiments ). TOWARDS EXPERIMENTAL TESTS OF QUANTUM EFFECTS IN CYTOSKELETAL PROTEINS
First on my mind is and was the idea of the Olfactory experience. As well, the idea of a photosynthesis as a capability and recognition of such an ability "as a distributor of of such quantum effects." Bird navigation using the earths magnetic feild.
You must understand that by no means do I pretend to know all of the answer, is more to demonstrate the learning that is going on toward dealing with some of the things that are demonstrative of understanding quantum effects as a measurable things. A measurable thing, that we as conscious beings make use of. A measurable thing in which we wish to emulate in quantum computing effects as measurable things to increase our depths of perception. Too Robotize.
We are creating machines with which to extend our perceptions in space and on Mars. Space travel and designated satellite space craft with which to examine that environment.
Big Ideas presents Seth Lloyd of the Massachusetts Institute for Technology on Quantum Life, how organisms have evolved to make use of quantum effects.
Also too then is the idea that such progress to provide sensor data which extends our range of perspective, as measures also help us to see consciousness as a useful thing. Consciousness's layers, which help to provide depth and understanding, using such data observation.
Statistical and applied probabilistic knowledge is the core of knowledge; statistics is what tells you if something is true, false, or merely anecdotal; it is the "logic of science"; it is the instrument of risk-taking; it is the applied tools of epistemology; you can't be a modern intellectual and not think probabilistically—but... let's not be suckers. The problem is much more complicated than it seems to the casual, mechanistic user who picked it up in graduate school. Statistics can fool you. In fact it is fooling your government right now. It can even bankrupt the system (let's face it: use of probabilistic methods for the estimation of risks did just blow up the banking system).THE FOURTH QUADRANT: A MAP OF THE LIMITS OF STATISTICS [9.15.08] By Nassim Nicholas Taleb
Such depths are required to analyze the economic functions in society, as requiring more sensitive fundamental measures since being betray by political influence. This is so as to see the economy "as tool to influence." Greater then is the question to identify aspects of these models with which consciousness uses, so as to demonstrate aspect and dealings "as attributes" in that society. It requires a greater depth of perception then ever required before? So shall we say then that the economy suffers from no quantum effects at all?
Nassim Nicholas Taleb - What is a "Black Swan?"
Of course, I am not going to be most perfect in the science understanding which always begs for those that are the willing in science to help correct any mistakes that I may be perpetrating as a science enthusiast. Again caution here as to my status as a layman.