Interesting, I came to an opposite conclusion using relatively logical and rational reasoning. There are really strong arguments suggesting that consciousness can't be explained as a complex interaction of physical particles.
Hint: the core of the problem (and core of many, if not most, philosopical problems) is "What is the definition of consciousness?"
If you can't define what a consciousness is then you can't claim it's impossible to explain physically. How can there be strong arguments supporting a hypotheses if fundamental parts of the hypothesis aren't defined?
I didn't say that I can't define consciousness. The problem is that consciousness doesn't have a reasonable objective definition. So my definition is subjective: "Consciousness is my ability to perceive and feel, for example the ability to feel pain or to dream." HN is not very good for this type of discussion, we (or anyone reading this) can continue here if you want: http://public.enterprisewiki.co/7a8b0605-d425-460d-8b57-354a....
Hint: the core of the problem (and core of many, if not most, philosopical problems) is "What is the definition of consciousness?"