Loopholes are a problem with a standard. But a problem that probably needs revision rather than just scraping the standards.

1. I said nothing about souls. If I’m talking about souls (without direct prompting), I’m deep in a psychotic episode.

2. I don’t really get what you mean by the gestures broadly thing? I’m very open to an expansion on that thought, but have no current sense of what that means.

3. It’s not just the vague idea of quantum hootnannies, it is the fact that intentionally inducing extra quantum hootnannies in the brain structure of animals has a noticeable impact on the effects of various anesthesia, i.e. the “anti-conciousness drugs”.

I’m not claiming there is definitive proof, I’m simply stating there is some real, empirical evidence that supports the notion that consciousness is an emergent property reliant upon a maybe narrow range of emergent effects from quantum mechanics that are inherently absent from Turing machine computational models.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374724769_Quantum_Consciousness_Empirical_Evidence_for_Quantum_Mechanisms_in_Human_Cognition_and_Consciousness

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12871-025-02956-9

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-85673-w

There is some limited empirical evidence to support the hypothesis, yes.

For example:

Through state-of-the-art spectroscopic techniques, specifically two-dimensional electronic spectroscopy (2DES), we’ve detected quantum coherent processes in the microtubules within neural structures. This provides empirical support to our hypothesis about the role of quantum mechanisms in cognition. Furthermore, we provide substantial empirical evidence for quantum mechanisms underlying cognitive processes, including decision-making and memory recall, and present a quantum model of consciousness.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374724769_Quantum_Consciousness_Empirical_Evidence_for_Quantum_Mechanisms_in_Human_Cognition_and_Consciousness

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/human-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2025.1676585/full

Quantum effects are literally one of the things that computers are designed specifically to avoid. We’re bumping up against the point where we can make conventional computer chips more dense the same ways we have previously since quantum tunneling causes some noticeable errors in computing when things get too much closer together.

The difference of scale is in the grey area of the difference of scale of quantum and classical mechanics, though. Conciousness very much could be something that depends on the emergent properties of quantum mechanics and doesn’t reach classical mechanics.

There may not be proof that LLMs aren’t sentient, but there is some evidence and reason to believe that consciousness is an emergent property of quantum effects, whereas turing machines are relegated to classical mechanics. The same evidence would indicate it is unlikely that a turing machine could replicate the human brain since it uses fundamentally different layers of reality to calculate/think.