A theory of everything should not only tell us the laws for matter, gravity, and possibly boundary condition for the universe. In addition, it should specify the relation between theory and experience. Here I argue for a minimal prescription in extracting empirical predictions from path integrals by showing that alternative prescriptions are unjustifiable. In this minimal prescription, the relative probability for one experience is obtained by summing over all configurations compatible with that experience, without any further restriction associated with other experiences of the same or other experiential beings. An application to Wigner's friend settings shows that quantum theory admits objective predictions for subjective experiences. Still, quantum theory differs from classical theory in offering individualized as opposed to collective accounts of experiences. This consideration of experience in fundamental theories issues several challenges to popular quantum interpretations, and points to the outstanding need for a theory of experience in understanding physical theories of everything.
A theory of everything should not only tell us the laws for matter, gravity, and possibly boundary condition for the universe. In addition, it should specify the relation between theory and experience. Here I argue for a minimal prescription in extracting empirical predictions from path integrals by showing that alternative prescriptions are unjustifiable. In this minimal prescription, the relative probability for one experience is obtained by summing over all configurations compatible with that experience, without any further restriction associated with other experiences of the same or other experiential beings. An application to Wigner's friend settings shows that quantum theory admits objective predictions for subjective experiences. Still, quantum theory differs from classical theory in offering individualized as opposed to collective accounts of experiences. This consideration of experience in fundamental theories issues several challenges to popular quantum interpretations, and points to the outstanding need for a theory of experience in understanding physical theories of everything.
Most interpretations of quantum theory fail to provide a fundamental, complete, self-consistent account of nature describing physical reality itself, as opposed to merely yielding predictions about results of experiments and observations. A paradigm providing a self-consistent foundation for quantum theory and a description of the reality it refers to, generalized to a worldview, is a Quantum Paradigm, where ‘paradigm' is defined as structure of experiential reality. We assert that the fundamental obstruction in the quest for a quantum paradigm is the assumption of objectivity. The subject-object distinction, drawn within experience, has within the natural sciences degenerated into a dichotomy-an absolute split into separate realms-with scientists adopting the classical paradigm where the object pole of experience ("objective reality") can be studied independently from the subject pole ("the experiencer"), with a presupposition that this procedure yields a fundamental description of nature. In fact, the subjective is often eliminated altogether as a fundamental category, and reduced to an epiphenomenon of objective processes. We claim this objectivity assumption precludes a full comprehension and a paradox-free formulation of quantum theory. By challenging this presupposition, i.e. leaving the question open, a coherent understanding of quantum nature falls naturally into place, providing appropriate foundation for quantum theory and an associated world-view. The resulting Quantum Paradigm is "realist" in the sense that it provides a description of what is actually happening: namely the arena of all happening is Mind or Consciousness-from which mind and matter, subject and object, individual and collective, and time and space co-dependently arise. The subject matter of quantum theory then becomes the fundamental mind-function of distinction ("measurement"), resulting in information and its statistical correlations. The message of quantum mechanics is surprising: the basic components of objects-the particles, electrons, quarks, etc.-cannot be thought of as ‘self-existent'. The reality that they, and hence all objects, are components of is ‘empirical reality', of experience."The universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine."-James Jeans Anomalous phenomena such as ESP and psychokinesis, collective consciousness, and synchronicity that are considered impossible in the context of the classical paradigm, fit naturally in, and can in turn provide evidence for the Quantum Paradigm. Spirituality and science are shown to be complementary approaches referring to the same reality, Mind, while each discipline retains its integrity. The Quantum Paradigm can be intellectually comprehended, as well as embodied: one can live in quantum reality. A good metaphor for this is "life as a dream": with no "real" objects as distinguished from experienced objects. Experience is "empty" of self-nature in the Buddhist sense, with everything interconnected and co-dependently arising. Experiencing the world by "embodying the Quantum Paradigm" is transformative, healing, and an antidote to alienation resulting from embodying the classical paradigm. Embodying the Quantum Paradigm and living in the Oneness of all creation can help humanity-increasingly lost in the materialism and individualism reinforced by our embodiment of the classical paradigm-and restore intimate connection and harmony with Spirit, Nature and fellow humans; we need such a transformation to survive and thrive in our technological society.
There exist dozens of interpretations of quantum theory, but they do not seem to contribute much to understanding the theory.This paper attempts to clarify some issues that are discussed in those interpretations.The main keywords are: "Classical ontology", Indeterminism, Probability, Predictions, The necessity of classical concepts, Minimal interpretation, Lattice, Physical objects, Alternatives to quantum theory?, Measurement, Realism.One of the main points of this paper is the role of predictions in understanding any theory of physics.
I take a pragmatist perspective on quantum theory. This is not a view of the world described by quantum theory. In this view quantum theory itself does not describe the physical world, nor our observatons, experiences or opinions of it. Instead, the theory offers reliable advice on when to expect an event of one kind or another, and on how strongly to expect each possible outcome of that event. The actual outcome is a perspectival fact: a fact relative to a physical context of assessment. Measurement outcomes and quantum states are both perspectival. By noticing that each must be relativized to an appropriate physical context one can resolve the measurement problem and the problem of nonlocal action. But if the outcome of a quantum measurement is not an absolute fact, then why shoud the statistics of such outcomes give us any objective reason to accept quantum theory? One can describe extensions of the scenario of Wigner's friend in which a statement expressing the outcome of a quantum measurement would be true relative to one such context but not relative to another. However, physical conditions in our world prevent us from realizing such scenarios. Since the outcome of every actual quantum measurement is certified at what is essentially a single context of assessment, the outcome relative to that context is an objective fact in the only sense that matters for science. We should accept quantum theory because the statistics these outcomes display are just those it leads us to expect.
There exist dozens of interpretations of quantum theory, but they do not seem to contribute much to understanding the theory. This paper attempts to clarify some issues that are discussed in those interpretations. The main keywords are: "Classical ontology", Indeterminism, Probability, Predictions, The necessity of classical concepts, Minimal interpretation, Lattice, Physical objects, Alternatives to quantum theory?, Measurement, Realism. One of the main points of this paper is the role of predictions in understanding any theory of physics.
We propose a realistic, spacetime interpretation of quantum theory in which reality constitutes a *single* history obeying a "law of motion" that makes definite, but incomplete, predictions about its behavior. We associate a "quantum measure" |S| to the set S of histories, and point out that |S| fulfills a sum rule generalizing that of classical probability theory. We interpret |S| as a "propensity", making this precise by stating a criterion for |S|=0 to imply "preclusion" (meaning that the true history will not lie in S). The criterion involves triads of correlated events, and in application to electron-electron scattering, for example, it yields definite predictions about the electron trajectories themselves, independently of any measuring devices which might or might not be present. (So we can give an objective account of measurements.) Two unfinished aspects of the interpretation involve *conditonal* preclusion (which apparently requires a notion of coarse-graining for its formulation) and the need to "locate spacetime regions in advance" without the aid of a fixed background metric (which can be achieved in the context of conditional preclusion via a construction which makes sense both in continuum gravity and in the discrete setting of causal set theory).
This monograph develops and defends Experiential Structural Ontology (ESO), a metaphysical framework constrained by contemporary physics. The framework begins from a tension in contemporary physics: quantum theory replaces classical objecthood with nonseparable relational structure, and several approaches to quantum gravity reconstruct spacetime from deeper organisational relations. Structural realism captures this shift in physical description, yet it leaves open how such structure exists as a concrete world. ESO proposes that experiential manifestation provides a minimal ontological ground capable of rendering relational structure determinate as concrete occurrence. Experience is not introduced as a psychological posit. It names the mode in which relational organisation is present as determinate occurrence. Consciousness, understood as experiential manifestation, is primitive in this limited sense. Physical reality is interpreted as stable constraint architecture enacted within experiential occurrence. The framework draws its constraints from experimentally established quantum nonseparability and decoherence together with research programmes that model spacetime as emergent from deeper relational organisation. These constraints are used to assess leading foundational positions. Several leading positions preserve relational description yet do not fully account for the transition from formal structure to concrete manifestation. ESO proposes that this instantiation deficit can be addressed without appeal to hidden substrates, quiddities, or additional primitive laws. Within this account, physical laws function as stability constraints on experiential transition. Objects and spacetime are interpreted as dynamically stabilised organisational structures, and subjects as individuated streams of integrated experiential organisation. The hard problem of consciousness is recast as a question concerning the organisation of experiential structure under physical constraint. ESO develops the relational commitments of structural realism within an explicit ontological framework that addresses the grounding demands imposed by contemporary physics while retaining full empirical discipline.