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

International Journal of Quantum Chemistry

The conscious mind: In search of a fundamental theory

Frederick Gregory

Published Jan 1, 1998• 115 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1002/(sici)1097-461x(1998)66:1<107::aid-qua9>3.0.co;2-z

Related papers

QUANTUM PARTICLES, CONSCIOUSNESS, UNIFIED FIELD THEORY AND RELATIVITY

Bertrand Wong

The paper describes the relation between quantum particles, consciousness, the unified field theory and relativity. According to Dirac, light can be treated as waves or particles. In fact, in quantum mechanics, particles are regarded as waves. The behaviour of these particles can be predicted, as it were, and, they are thus known as probability waves or Dirac wave particles. There is a wave/particle duality here. When the particle is not observed (when consciousness is not present), it remains a wave (a probability wave), but upon being observed (when consciousness is present) it becomes a particle. Hence, the evident importance of the part played by consciousness in quantum mechanics. A number of scientists had postulated that there must be a “cosmic consciousness” pervading the universe; objects spring into existence when measurements are made, measurements which are made by conscious beings, which implies that there must be cosmic consciousness that pervades the universe determining which state we are in - some scientists, e.g., Nobel laureate Eugene Wigner, had argued that this is proof of the existence of God or some cosmic consciousness. Wigner had remarked that it was not possible to formulate the laws of quantum theory in a fully consistent way without reference to consciousness. Consciousness or “mind-force” is evidently a potent force in nature. The mind is part, an indispensable part, of nature. Scientists such as David Bohm and Werner Heisenberg, as well as many other scientists, evidently understood this fundamental aspect. Classical philosophers such as Berkeley and Hume had wondered whether the existence of any object was independent of the existence of the mind or consciousness: If I had never seen (never been aware of) an object, does that object exist? Thus, even if a unified field theory or theory of everything were obtained, it will still not give a complete picture of nature if consciousness were excluded. There should therefore be a complementary General Theory of Consciousness. This General Theory of Consciousness will be a very important aspect in our search for the ultimate truth. Many scientists, e.g., David Bohm, Wolfgang Pauli, John von Neumann, Arthur Eddington, Roger Penrose, George Wald, etc., had declared that the universe is mind-stuff. The capabilities of the human mind are so unique that no intelligent

•Oct 1, 2011•1 citation

The nature of consciousness

Evan Harris Walker

Mathematical Biosciences•Feb 1, 1970•54 citations

A Quantum Theory of Consciousness

Shan Gao

Minds and Machines•Dec 3, 2007•16 citations

The Hard Problem for Physics: In Search of a Place for Consciousness in Physical Theories

O.A. Lange

Although it is not endorsed by every theoretical physicist, I hold that - paraphrasing Abner Shimony - a theory of everything must 'close the circle'. That is, it must provide an account of the existence of consciousness in nature. Phenomenal consciousness, this intimate 'feel of me being me', is difficult to grasp in physical terms. David Chalmers famously distinguished the 'easy' cognitive problems of the mind from the true 'hard problem': physical theories describe worlds that could have been zombie-worlds as well, i.e. worlds occupied by creatures who act the way we do, but who do not share with us that special aspect we call phenomenal consciousness. That is to say, the facts of physics do not entail it.\nIn this thesis I explore how we should understand the problem from the perspectives of a discipline that seems to be concerned by its very nature with 'a view from the outside'. The burden of the hard problem of consciousness for physics seems to be concerned with putting a shift from the third- to the first person's perspective somewhere into physics. A deeper analysis of two concrete proposals for a physical theory of the mind reveals that specific interpretations of quantum mechanics take this first person's perspective as fundamental from the outset. It turns out that views on the ontology of quantum theory sometimes perfectly align with perspectives on the ontology of consciousness. I conclude that the essence of the hard problem for physics must not be concerned with an explanation of the existence of consciousness, but that it rather should be about the identification of metaphysically reasonable grounds to decide where to put it into nature.

•Jan 1, 2019•0 citations

A Quantum Theory of Consciousness

Henry Pierce Stapp

The frontiers collection•Feb 12, 2009•40 citations

QUANTUM AND CONSCIOUSNESS: IN SEARCH OF A NEW PARADIGM

Ervin Laszlo

Abstract. Two fundamental issues raised by Lothar Schäfer are considered: (1) the question of a suitable paradigm within which the findings of quantum physics can be optimally interpreted and (2) the question of the assessment of the presence and importance of mind and consciousness in the universe. In regard to the former, I contend that the ideal of science is to interpret its findings in an optimally consistent and minimally speculative framework. In this context Schäfer's assertion that certain findings in quantum physics (those that relate to virtual states) indicate the presence of mind at the quantum level implies a dualistic and hence unnecessarily speculative assumption. In regard to the assessment of mind and consciousness, a consistent and parsimonious paradigm suggests that mind and consciousness are not part of a chain of events consisting of an admixture of physical and mental events but that physical events form a single, coherent set of events, and mental events another set, with the two sets related, as Teilhard (and a number of other philosophers, including White head) affirmed, as the “within” and the “without” (or the “mental pole” and the “physical pole”) of one and the same fundamental reality. This panpsychist as contrasted with Schäfer's dualist paradigm provides a single self‐consistent framework for the interpretation of quantum (and all natural) events while recognizing the presence of mind in the universe as the least speculative realist implication of our immediate experience of consciousness.

Zygon®•Sep 2, 2006•5 citations
The paper describes the relation between quantum particles, consciousness, the unified field theory and relativity. According to Dirac, light can be treated as waves or particles. In fact, in quantum mechanics, particles are regarded as waves. The behaviour of these particles can be predicted, as it were, and, they are thus known as probability waves or Dirac wave particles. There is a wave/particle duality here. When the particle is not observed (when consciousness is not present), it remains a wave (a probability wave), but upon being observed (when consciousness is present) it becomes a particle. Hence, the evident importance of the part played by consciousness in quantum mechanics. A number of scientists had postulated that there must be a “cosmic consciousness” pervading the universe; objects spring into existence when measurements are made, measurements which are made by conscious beings, which implies that there must be cosmic consciousness that pervades the universe determining which state we are in - some scientists, e.g., Nobel laureate Eugene Wigner, had argued that this is proof of the existence of God or some cosmic consciousness. Wigner had remarked that it was not possible to formulate the laws of quantum theory in a fully consistent way without reference to consciousness. Consciousness or “mind-force” is evidently a potent force in nature. The mind is part, an indispensable part, of nature. Scientists such as David Bohm and Werner Heisenberg, as well as many other scientists, evidently understood this fundamental aspect. Classical philosophers such as Berkeley and Hume had wondered whether the existence of any object was independent of the existence of the mind or consciousness: If I had never seen (never been aware of) an object, does that object exist? Thus, even if a unified field theory or theory of everything were obtained, it will still not give a complete picture of nature if consciousness were excluded. There should therefore be a complementary General Theory of Consciousness. This General Theory of Consciousness will be a very important aspect in our search for the ultimate truth. Many scientists, e.g., David Bohm, Wolfgang Pauli, John von Neumann, Arthur Eddington, Roger Penrose, George Wald, etc., had declared that the universe is mind-stuff. The capabilities of the human mind are so unique that no intelligent
Although it is not endorsed by every theoretical physicist, I hold that - paraphrasing Abner Shimony - a theory of everything must 'close the circle'. That is, it must provide an account of the existence of consciousness in nature. Phenomenal consciousness, this intimate 'feel of me being me', is difficult to grasp in physical terms. David Chalmers famously distinguished the 'easy' cognitive problems of the mind from the true 'hard problem': physical theories describe worlds that could have been zombie-worlds as well, i.e. worlds occupied by creatures who act the way we do, but who do not share with us that special aspect we call phenomenal consciousness. That is to say, the facts of physics do not entail it.\nIn this thesis I explore how we should understand the problem from the perspectives of a discipline that seems to be concerned by its very nature with 'a view from the outside'. The burden of the hard problem of consciousness for physics seems to be concerned with putting a shift from the third- to the first person's perspective somewhere into physics. A deeper analysis of two concrete proposals for a physical theory of the mind reveals that specific interpretations of quantum mechanics take this first person's perspective as fundamental from the outset. It turns out that views on the ontology of quantum theory sometimes perfectly align with perspectives on the ontology of consciousness. I conclude that the essence of the hard problem for physics must not be concerned with an explanation of the existence of consciousness, but that it rather should be about the identification of metaphysically reasonable grounds to decide where to put it into nature.
Abstract. Two fundamental issues raised by Lothar Schäfer are considered: (1) the question of a suitable paradigm within which the findings of quantum physics can be optimally interpreted and (2) the question of the assessment of the presence and importance of mind and consciousness in the universe. In regard to the former, I contend that the ideal of science is to interpret its findings in an optimally consistent and minimally speculative framework. In this context Schäfer's assertion that certain findings in quantum physics (those that relate to virtual states) indicate the presence of mind at the quantum level implies a dualistic and hence unnecessarily speculative assumption. In regard to the assessment of mind and consciousness, a consistent and parsimonious paradigm suggests that mind and consciousness are not part of a chain of events consisting of an admixture of physical and mental events but that physical events form a single, coherent set of events, and mental events another set, with the two sets related, as Teilhard (and a number of other philosophers, including White head) affirmed, as the “within” and the “without” (or the “mental pole” and the “physical pole”) of one and the same fundamental reality. This panpsychist as contrasted with Schäfer's dualist paradigm provides a single self‐consistent framework for the interpretation of quantum (and all natural) events while recognizing the presence of mind in the universe as the least speculative realist implication of our immediate experience of consciousness.