Just for the record, almost nobody accepts the thesis of that book. Penrose is a great fundamental physicist who believes (or did back in 1990) that new fundame

Just for the record, almost nobody accepts the thesis of that book. Penrose is a great fundamental physicist who believes (or did back in 1990) that new fundamental physics is needed to explain how brains produce intelligent behaviour. The dominant contrary opinion is that this can be done using some form of computation. Other opinions are that something other than computation in the Turing sense is required, but that current physics is probably sufficient to describe it. Very few people think that a theory of e.g. quantum gravity is the right level of explanation for the phenomena of intelligent behaviour. I think Penrose fell into a common trap: when you are an expert on hammers, every hard problem looks like it needs a whack with a better hammer.