Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:2005.04101

Relativistic Implications for Physical Copies of Conscious States

Andrew Knight

Published Apr 28, 2020• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

The possibility of algorithmic consciousness depends on the assumption that conscious states can be copied or repeated by sufficiently duplicating their underlying physical states, leading to a variety of paradoxes, including the problems of duplication, teleportation, simulation, self-location, the Boltzmann brain, and Wigner's Friend. In an effort to further elucidate the physical nature of consciousness, I challenge these assumptions by analyzing the implications of special relativity on evolutions of identical copies of a mental state, particularly the divergence of these evolutions due to quantum fluctuations. By assuming the supervenience of a conscious state on some sufficient underlying physical state, I show that the existence of two or more instances, whether spacelike or timelike, of the same conscious state leads to a logical contradiction, ultimately refuting the assumption that a conscious state can be physically reset to an earlier state or duplicated by any physical means. Several explanatory hypotheses and implications are addressed, particularly the relationships between consciousness, locality, physical irreversibility, and quantum no-cloning.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2005.04101

Related papers

Teletransportation paradox and quantum consciousness

Everett X. Wang, Zhong Lin Wang, Shudong Zhou +2 more

Recent research suggests that the human brain may possess quantum computing capabilities, but the implications for consciousness remain unclear. This study investigates the role of quantum computing in accounting for the nature of consciousness using teletransportation thought experiments to transfer a person from one location to another. Two versions of the experiment are proposed using the brain as an apparatus, and the results are analyzed using classical and quantum computing principles. The findings suggest that classical computing principles alone cannot account for consciousness, and that quantum computing capabilities in the brain are necessary. Furthermore, the no-cloning theorem guarantees a unique copy of quantum states in the brain, resolving a teletransportation paradox proposed by Derek Parfit. These results suggest that quantum computing in the brain is crucial to understanding the nature of consciousness.

Physics Essays•Sep 3, 2023•1 citation

Quantum mechanics, objective reality, and the problem of consciousness

Ranjan Mukhopadhyay

The hard problem in consciousness is the problem of understanding how physical processes in the brain could give rise to subjective conscious experience. In this paper, I suggest that in order to understand the relationship between consciousness and the physical world, we need to probe deeply into the nature of physical reality. This leads us to quantum physics and to a second explanatory gap: that between quantum and classical reality. I will seek a philosophical framework that can address these two gaps simultaneously. Our analysis of quantum mechanics will naturally lead us to the notion of a hidden reality and to the postulate that consciousness is an integral component of this reality. The framework proposed in the paper provides the philosophical underpinnings for a theory of consciousness while satisfactorily resolving the interpretation problem in quantum mechanics without the need to alter its mathematical structure. I also discuss some implications for a scientific theory of consciousness.

arXiv:1804.03606•Journal of Consciousness Studies•Apr 10, 2018•3 citations

On the significance of Wigner's Friend in contexts beyond quantum foundations

Caroline L. Jones, Markus P. Müller

There has been a surge of recent interest in the Wigner's Friend paradox, sparking several novel thought experiments and no-go theorems. The main narrative has been that Wigner's Friend highlights a counterintuitive feature that is unique to quantum theory, and which is closely related to the quantum measurement problem. Here, we challenge this view. We argue that the gist of the Wigner's Friend paradox can be reproduced without assuming quantum physics, and that it underlies a much broader class of enigmas in the foundations of physics and philosophy. To show this, we first consider several recently proposed Extended Wigner's Friend scenarios, and demonstrate that some of their implications for the absoluteness of observations can be reproduced by classical thought experiments that involve the duplication of agents. Crucially, some of these classical scenarios are technologically much easier to implement than their quantum counterparts. Then, we argue that the essential structural ingredient of all these scenarios is a feature that we call "Restriction A": that a physical theory cannot give us a probabilistic description of the observations of all agents. Finally, we argue that this difficulty is at the core of other puzzles in the foundations of physics and philosophy, and demonstrate this explicitly for cosmology's Boltzmann brain problem. Our analysis suggests that Wigner's Friend should be studied in a larger context, addressing a frontier of human knowledge beyond quantum foundations: to obtain reliable predictions for experiments in which these predictions can be privately but not intersubjectively verified.

arXiv:2402.08727•Quantum•Jun 30, 2026•0 citations

Modelling of consciousness and interpretation of quantum mechanics

Merle, Éric

I start from the fundamental principles of non-relativistic quantum mechanics, without probability, and interpret them using the notion of coexistence: a quantum state can be read, not uniquely, as a coexistence of other quantum states, which are pairwise orthogonal. In this formalism, I prove that a conscious observer is necessarily a physical object that can memorize local events by setting one of its parts in an exactly specified constant quantum state (hypotheses H1, H2 and H3). Then I define the probability of a future event as the proportion of initial observers, all identical, who will actually experience that event. It then becomes possible to establish the usual results of quantum mechanics. Furthermore, I detail the link between probabilities and relative frequencies. Additionally, I study the biological feasibility of this modelling of observer's mind. The second part of this paper completes the neuronal description of the mind functions, based on current neuroscientific knowledge. It provides a model that is compatible with the assumptions of the first part and consistent with our daily conscious experience. In particular, it develops a model of self-consciousness based on an explicit use of the random component of neuron behaviour; according to the first part, that random is in fact the coexistence of a multiplicity of possibilities. So, when the mind measures the random part of certain neurons in the brain, he goes himself within each of these possibilities. The mind has a decision-making component that is active in this situation, appearing then as the cause of the choice of this possibility among all the others. This models the self-consciousness which then ensures the unity of our conscious experience by equating this experience with ``what the ego is conscious about''. The conclusion details the points that remain to be developed.

arXiv:1807.07669•Jul 20, 2018•0 citations

No-Go Theorems on Machine Consciousness

Subhash C. Kak

Creating machines that are conscious is a long term objective of research in artificial intelligence. This paper look at this idea with new arguments from physics and logic. Observers have no place in classical physics, and although they play a role in measurement in quantum physics there is no explanation for their emergence within the framework. There is suggestion that consciousness, which is implicitly a property of the observer, is a consequence of the complexity of specific brain structures, but this is problematic because one associates free will with consciousness, which goes counter to causal closure of physics. Considering a nested physical system, we argue that even if the system were assumed to have agency, observers cannot exist within it. Since complex systems can be viewed in nested hierarchies, this constitutes a proof against consciousness as a product of complexity, for then we will have nested system of conscious agents. As the existence of consciousness in cognitive agents cannot be denied, the implication is that consciousness belongs to a dimension that is not physical and machine consciousness is unattainable. These ideas are used to take a fresh look at two well-known paradoxes of quantum theory that are important in quantum information theory.

Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Consciousness•Sep 1, 2023•7 citations

The Physical Foundations of Life and Consciousness, Framework 1.x

Suresh K Maran

In this paper, I propose a set of ideas to explain the phenomena of life and consciousness in the universe and their relation to the interpretation of quantum mechanics. Consciousness is described as a result of specific dynamical configurations of matter and fields aided by fundamental properties of nature proposed in this paper. First, I review the various theories of consciousness in current literature and come up with various hypotheses, definitions, and propositions to build a physical theory of consciousness. I introduce the concept of interaction binding of consciousness and discuss in detail how the brain gives rise to consciousness. I propose three sets of postulates on the physical foundations of consciousness from a quantum general relativistic background using the Quantum General Relativistic Framework, 5 proposals to understand time and reduction. A Quantum Reduction Free Will Equivalence Principle is discussed to link quantum reduction to conscious free will. I discuss the potential possibility of retrocausal effects on consciousness-influenced reduction probability. I discuss the concept of conscious being as a more general concept than conscious identity, as separate from conscious content, and its nature. I introduce the concept of classicum as an analog of the quantum, and discuss its relation to consciousness. I discuss mathematical measures to calculate the complexity of harmonic relational structures. I put these together in a set of propositions on the nature of consciousness and its relation to the nature of quantum phenomena. I discuss a mathematical model of interaction binding, and free will. I discuss theory and experiments to verify these

•May 4, 2024•0 citations
The possibility of algorithmic consciousness depends on the assumption that conscious states can be copied or repeated by sufficiently duplicating their underlying physical states, leading to a variety of paradoxes, including the problems of duplication, teleportation, simulation, self-location, the Boltzmann brain, and Wigner's Friend. In an effort to further elucidate the physical nature of consciousness, I challenge these assumptions by analyzing the implications of special relativity on evolutions of identical copies of a mental state, particularly the divergence of these evolutions due to quantum fluctuations. By assuming the supervenience of a conscious state on some sufficient underlying physical state, I show that the existence of two or more instances, whether spacelike or timelike, of the same conscious state leads to a logical contradiction, ultimately refuting the assumption that a conscious state can be physically reset to an earlier state or duplicated by any physical means. Several explanatory hypotheses and implications are addressed, particularly the relationships between consciousness, locality, physical irreversibility, and quantum no-cloning.
Recent research suggests that the human brain may possess quantum computing capabilities, but the implications for consciousness remain unclear. This study investigates the role of quantum computing in accounting for the nature of consciousness using teletransportation thought experiments to transfer a person from one location to another. Two versions of the experiment are proposed using the brain as an apparatus, and the results are analyzed using classical and quantum computing principles. The findings suggest that classical computing principles alone cannot account for consciousness, and that quantum computing capabilities in the brain are necessary. Furthermore, the no-cloning theorem guarantees a unique copy of quantum states in the brain, resolving a teletransportation paradox proposed by Derek Parfit. These results suggest that quantum computing in the brain is crucial to understanding the nature of consciousness.
The hard problem in consciousness is the problem of understanding how physical processes in the brain could give rise to subjective conscious experience. In this paper, I suggest that in order to understand the relationship between consciousness and the physical world, we need to probe deeply into the nature of physical reality. This leads us to quantum physics and to a second explanatory gap: that between quantum and classical reality. I will seek a philosophical framework that can address these two gaps simultaneously. Our analysis of quantum mechanics will naturally lead us to the notion of a hidden reality and to the postulate that consciousness is an integral component of this reality. The framework proposed in the paper provides the philosophical underpinnings for a theory of consciousness while satisfactorily resolving the interpretation problem in quantum mechanics without the need to alter its mathematical structure. I also discuss some implications for a scientific theory of consciousness.
There has been a surge of recent interest in the Wigner's Friend paradox, sparking several novel thought experiments and no-go theorems. The main narrative has been that Wigner's Friend highlights a counterintuitive feature that is unique to quantum theory, and which is closely related to the quantum measurement problem. Here, we challenge this view. We argue that the gist of the Wigner's Friend paradox can be reproduced without assuming quantum physics, and that it underlies a much broader class of enigmas in the foundations of physics and philosophy. To show this, we first consider several recently proposed Extended Wigner's Friend scenarios, and demonstrate that some of their implications for the absoluteness of observations can be reproduced by classical thought experiments that involve the duplication of agents. Crucially, some of these classical scenarios are technologically much easier to implement than their quantum counterparts. Then, we argue that the essential structural ingredient of all these scenarios is a feature that we call "Restriction A": that a physical theory cannot give us a probabilistic description of the observations of all agents. Finally, we argue that this difficulty is at the core of other puzzles in the foundations of physics and philosophy, and demonstrate this explicitly for cosmology's Boltzmann brain problem. Our analysis suggests that Wigner's Friend should be studied in a larger context, addressing a frontier of human knowledge beyond quantum foundations: to obtain reliable predictions for experiments in which these predictions can be privately but not intersubjectively verified.
I start from the fundamental principles of non-relativistic quantum mechanics, without probability, and interpret them using the notion of coexistence: a quantum state can be read, not uniquely, as a coexistence of other quantum states, which are pairwise orthogonal. In this formalism, I prove that a conscious observer is necessarily a physical object that can memorize local events by setting one of its parts in an exactly specified constant quantum state (hypotheses H1, H2 and H3). Then I define the probability of a future event as the proportion of initial observers, all identical, who will actually experience that event. It then becomes possible to establish the usual results of quantum mechanics. Furthermore, I detail the link between probabilities and relative frequencies. Additionally, I study the biological feasibility of this modelling of observer's mind. The second part of this paper completes the neuronal description of the mind functions, based on current neuroscientific knowledge. It provides a model that is compatible with the assumptions of the first part and consistent with our daily conscious experience. In particular, it develops a model of self-consciousness based on an explicit use of the random component of neuron behaviour; according to the first part, that random is in fact the coexistence of a multiplicity of possibilities. So, when the mind measures the random part of certain neurons in the brain, he goes himself within each of these possibilities. The mind has a decision-making component that is active in this situation, appearing then as the cause of the choice of this possibility among all the others. This models the self-consciousness which then ensures the unity of our conscious experience by equating this experience with ``what the ego is conscious about''. The conclusion details the points that remain to be developed.
Creating machines that are conscious is a long term objective of research in artificial intelligence. This paper look at this idea with new arguments from physics and logic. Observers have no place in classical physics, and although they play a role in measurement in quantum physics there is no explanation for their emergence within the framework. There is suggestion that consciousness, which is implicitly a property of the observer, is a consequence of the complexity of specific brain structures, but this is problematic because one associates free will with consciousness, which goes counter to causal closure of physics. Considering a nested physical system, we argue that even if the system were assumed to have agency, observers cannot exist within it. Since complex systems can be viewed in nested hierarchies, this constitutes a proof against consciousness as a product of complexity, for then we will have nested system of conscious agents. As the existence of consciousness in cognitive agents cannot be denied, the implication is that consciousness belongs to a dimension that is not physical and machine consciousness is unattainable. These ideas are used to take a fresh look at two well-known paradoxes of quantum theory that are important in quantum information theory.
In this paper, I propose a set of ideas to explain the phenomena of life and consciousness in the universe and their relation to the interpretation of quantum mechanics. Consciousness is described as a result of specific dynamical configurations of matter and fields aided by fundamental properties of nature proposed in this paper. First, I review the various theories of consciousness in current literature and come up with various hypotheses, definitions, and propositions to build a physical theory of consciousness. I introduce the concept of interaction binding of consciousness and discuss in detail how the brain gives rise to consciousness. I propose three sets of postulates on the physical foundations of consciousness from a quantum general relativistic background using the Quantum General Relativistic Framework, 5 proposals to understand time and reduction. A Quantum Reduction Free Will Equivalence Principle is discussed to link quantum reduction to conscious free will. I discuss the potential possibility of retrocausal effects on consciousness-influenced reduction probability. I discuss the concept of conscious being as a more general concept than conscious identity, as separate from conscious content, and its nature. I introduce the concept of classicum as an analog of the quantum, and discuss its relation to consciousness. I discuss mathematical measures to calculate the complexity of harmonic relational structures. I put these together in a set of propositions on the nature of consciousness and its relation to the nature of quantum phenomena. I discuss a mathematical model of interaction binding, and free will. I discuss theory and experiments to verify these