Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41132248›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in network physiology2025

The nature of quantum parallel processing and its implications for coding in brain neural networks: a novel computational mechanism.

Andrew S Johnson, William Winlow

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in network physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Andrew S JohnsonDipartimento di Biologia, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Napoli, Italy.
William WinlowDipartimento di Biologia, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Napoli, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Conventionally it is assumed that the nerve impulse is an electrical process based upon the observation that electrical stimuli produce an action potential as defined by Hodgkin Huxley (1952) (HH). Consequently, investigations into the computation of nerve impulses have almost universally been directed to electrically observed phenomenon. However, models of computation are fundamentally flawed and assume that an undiscovered timing system exists within the nervous system. In our view it is synchronisation of the action potential pulse (APPulse) that effects computation. The APPulse, a soliton pulse, is a novel purveyor of computation and is a quantum mechanical pulse: i.e., It is a non-Turing synchronised computational event. Furthermore, the APPulse computational interactions change frequencies measured in microseconds, rather than milliseconds, producing effective efficient computation. However, the HH action potential is a necessary component for entropy equilibrium, providing energy to open ion channels, but it is too slow to be functionally computational in a neural network. Here, we demonstrate that only quantum non-electrical soliton pulses converging to points of computation are the main computational structure with synaptic transmission occurring at slower millisecond speeds. Thus, the APPulse accompanying the action potential is the purveyor of computation; a novel computational mechanism, that is incompatible with Turing timed computation and artificial intelligence (AI).

Indexed as

action potentialAPPulsebrain neural networkcomputationnetwork physiologysoliton

Identifiers

PMID41132248
PMCPMC12540442

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.