The problem is that this might take more energy than the Sun for any physical computer. What is far less obvious is whether there exist any computable higher-order abstractions of the human mind that can be more feasibly implemented. Lots of layers to this - is there an easily computable model of neurons that encapsulates cognition, or do we have to model every protein and mRNA?
It may be analogous to integration: we can numerically integrate almost anything, but most functions are not symbolically integrable and most differential equations lack closed-form solutions. Maybe the only way to model human intelligence is "numerical."
In fact I suspect higher-order cognition is not Turing computable, though obviously I have no way of proving it. My issue is very general: Turing machines are symbolic, and one cannot define what a symbol actually is without using symbols - which means it cannot be defined at all. "Symbol" seems to be a primitive concept in humans, and I don't see how to transfer it to a Turing machine / ChatGPT reliably. Or, as a more minor point, our internal "common sense physics simulator" is qualitatively very powerful despite being quantitatively weak (the exact opposite of Sora/Veo/etc), which again does not seem amenable to a purely symbolic formulation: consider "if you blow the flame lightly it will flicker, if you blow hard it will go out." These symbols communicate the result without any insight into the computation.
[1] This doesn't have anything to do with Penrose's quantum consciousness stuff, it just assumes humans don't have metaphysical souls.