The ``Hard Problem" of consciousness refers to a long-standing enigma about how qualia emerge from physical processes in the brain. Building on insights from the development of non-Euclidean geometry, this paper seeks to present a structured and logically coherent theory of qualia to address this problem. The proposed theory starts with a definition on what it means for an entity to be non-physical. A postulate about awareness is posed and utilized to rigorously prove that qualia are non-physical and thoughts are qualia. Then the paper introduces a key concept: relative reality, meaning that perceptions of reality are relative to the observer and time. The concept is analyzed through a mathematical model grounded in Hilbert space theory. The model also sheds new light on cognitive science and physics. In particular, the Schrödinger equation can be derived easily through this model. Moreover, this model shows that eigenstates also exist for classical energy-conserving systems. Analyses on the G. P. Thomson experiment and the classical harmonic oscillator are made to illustrate this finding. The insight gained sheds new light on the Bohr-Einstein debate concerning the interpretation of quantum mechanics. At last, the paper proposes a postulate about qualia force and demonstrates that it constitutes a fundamental part of absolute reality, much like the four fundamental forces in nature.
The ``Hard Problem" of consciousness refers to a long-standing enigma about how qualia emerge from physical processes in the brain. Building on insights from the development of non-Euclidean geometry, this paper seeks to present a structured and logically coherent theory of qualia to address this problem. The proposed theory starts with a definition on what it means for an entity to be non-physical. A postulate about awareness is posed and utilized to rigorously prove that qualia are non-physical and thoughts are qualia. Then the paper introduces a key concept: relative reality, meaning that perceptions of reality are relative to the observer and time. The concept is analyzed through a mathematical model grounded in Hilbert space theory. The model also sheds new light on cognitive science and physics. In particular, the Schrödinger equation can be derived easily through this model. Moreover, this model shows that eigenstates also exist for classical energy-conserving systems. Analyses on the G. P. Thomson experiment and the classical harmonic oscillator are made to illustrate this finding. The insight gained sheds new light on the Bohr-Einstein debate concerning the interpretation of quantum mechanics. At last, the paper proposes a postulate about qualia force and demonstrates that it constitutes a fundamental part of absolute reality, much like the four fundamental forces in nature.
I propose that qualia are physical because they are directly observable, and revisit the contentious link between consciousness and quantum measurements from a new perspective -- one that does not rely on observers or wave function collapse but instead treats physical measurements as fundamental in a sense resonant with Wheeler's it-from-bit. Building on a mathematical definition of measurement space in physics, I reinterpret it as a model of qualia, effectively equating the measurement problem of quantum mechanics with the hard problem of consciousness. The resulting framework falls within panpsychism, and offers potential solutions to the combination problem. Moreover, some of the mathematical structure of measurement spaces, taken for granted in physics, needs justification for qualia, suggesting that the apparent solidity of physical reality is deeply rooted in how humans process information.
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.
To arbitrate theories of consciousness, scientists need to understand mathematical structures of quality of consciousness, or qualia. The dominant view regards qualia as points in a dimensional space. This view implicitly assumes that qualia can be measured without any effect on them. This contrasts with intuitions and empirical findings to show that by means of internal attention qualia can change when they are measured. What is a proper mathematical structure for entities that are affected by the act of measurement? Here we propose the mathematical structure used in quantum theory, in which we consider qualia as "observables" (i.e., entities that can, in principle, be observed), sensory inputs and internal attention as "states" that specify the context that a measurement takes place, and "measurement outcomes" with probabilities that qualia observables take particular values. Based on this mathematical structure, the Quantum-like Qualia (QQ) hypothesis proposes that qualia observables interact with the world, as if through an interface of sensory inputs and internal attention. We argue that this qualia-interface-world scheme has the same mathematical structure as observables-states-environment in quantum theory. Moreover, within this structure, the concept of a "measurement instrument" in quantum theory can precisely model how measurements affect qualia observables and states. We argue that QQ naturally explains known properties of qualia and predicts that qualia are sometimes indeterminate. Such predictions can be empirically determined by the presence of order effects or violations of Bell inequalities. Confirmation of such predictions substantiates our overarching claim that the mathematical structure of QQ will offer novel insights into the nature of consciousness.
To arbitrate theories of consciousness, scientists need to understand mathematical structures of quality of consciousness, or qualia. The dominant view regards qualia as points in a dimensional space. This view implicitly assumes that qualia can be measured without any effects on it. This contrasts with intuitions and empirical findings to show that by means of internal attention qualia can change when they are measured. What is a proper mathematical structure for entities that are affected by the act of measurement? Here we propose the mathematical structure used in quantum theory, in which we consider qualia as “observables” (i.e., entities that can, in principle, be observed), sensory inputs and internal attention as “states” that specify the context that a measurement takes place, and “measurement outcomes” with probabilities that qualia observables take particular values. Based on this mathematical structure, the Quantum-like Qualia (QQ) hypothesis proposes that qualia observables interact with the world, as if through an interface of sensory inputs and internal attention. We argue that this qualia-interface-world scheme has the same mathematical structure as observables-states-environment in quantum theory. Moreover, within this structure, the concept of an “measurement instrument” in quantum theory can precisely model how measurements affect qualia observables and states. We argue that QQ naturally explains known properties of qualia and predicts that qualia are sometimes indeterminate. Such predictions can be empirically determined by the presence of order effects or violations of Bell inequalities. Confirmation of such predictions substantiates our overarching claim that the mathematical structure of QQ will offer novel insights into the nature of consciousness.
Similar problems keep reappearing in both the discussion about the “hard ” problem of consciousness and in fundamental issues in quantum theory. We argue that the similarities are due to common problems within the conceptual foundations of both fields. In quantum physics, the state reduction marks the “coming into being” of a new aspect of reality for which no causal explanation is available. Likewise, the self-referential nature of consciousness constitutes a “coming into being ” of a new quality which goes beyond a fully causal account of reality. Both subjects require a categorical scheme which is significantly richer then the one used in addressing factual aspects of reality alone. While parts of this categorical scheme are realized in the formalism of quantum theory, they are seldom applied in the context of consciousness. We show what the structural limitations of a classical categorical framework are, how a richer framework can be developed, and how it can be applied to both quantum physics and consciousness. Concepts that have proven useful in ordering things easily achieve such authority over us that we forget their earthly origins and accept them as unalterable givens. Thus they come to be stamped as “necessities of thought”, “a priori givens”, etc. The path of scientific progress is often made impassable for a long time by such errors. Therefore it is by no means an idle game if we become practiced in analyzing long-held commonplace concepts and showing the circumstances on which their justification and usefulness depend, and how they have grown up, individually, out of the givens of experience. Thus their excessive authority will be broken. They will be removed if they cannot be properly legitimated, corrected if their correlation with given things be far too superfluous, or replaced if a new system can be established that we prefer for whatever reason.
To arbitrate theories of consciousness, scientists need mathematical models of consciousness or qualia. The dominant view regards qualia as points in a dimensional space. Implicit in this view is that qualia can be in principle measured without any effects on it. This contrasts with intuitions and various empirical findings about qualia that they can change when they are measured. How can we deal with entities that are affected by the act of measurement? We argue that mathematical formalisms of quantum theory are precisely developed to deal with such situations. Here, we propose qualia as “observables” (i.e., entities that can be in principle observed), sensory inputs and internal attention as “states” that specify the context that a measurement takes place, and “measurement outcomes” as expected values of qualia observables in a certain state. We propose to call this formalism as the Quantum Qualia (QQ) hypothesis. QQ proposes that qualia observables in a state interact with the world, as if through an interface of sensory inputs and internal attention. This qualia-interface-world scheme has the same mathematical structure as observables-states-environment in quantum theory. Within this framework, mathematical concepts of “instruments” can precisely formalize how measurements can affect (or update) qualia observables and states. QQ naturally explains intuitions about qualia, such as the nature of qualia as indeterminate entities. Finally, QQ leads to empirical predictions that challenge traditional models, such as order effects and violations of Bell inequalities. With further confirmation of such predictions, we believe that QQ will emerge as a viable alternate mathematical model of qualia, offering an important step towards understanding the nature and structures of consciousness.