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

NeuroQuantology

Ignazio Licata: The Latest Magna Graecia’s Natural Philosopher

Massimo Pregnolato, Ruggero Rapparini

Published Jun 1, 2013• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

He states he is not so much interested in discovering “how God made the World” as in how our theories describe it and are interconnected, in search for a unitary vision between mind and matter. Endowed with a physical intuition faster than any calculation, he can shift with self-assurance from Cosmology to Information Theory, from Physics at Planck scale and non-locality Geometry to Neurocomputing. His models are E. Majorana, L. Landau, W. Heisenberg, R. Feynman e F. Dyson, but his Damascus road has been D. Bohm vision. As for him “God always quantizes, but does not play dice, at all”. Physics – he says - is a way of life. With a passionate love for culture and music, Ignazio Licata is one of the last natural philosopher, but his language is that of non-commutative geometries, path integrals and renormalization group. NeuroQuantology | June 2013 | Volume 11 | Issue 2 | Page 277-288

DOI
10.14704/nq.2013.11.2.674

Related papers

Einstein’s Response to the New Dynamics

A. Pais

Abstract Everyone familiar with modern physics knows that Einstein’s attitude regarding quantum mechanics was one of skepticism. No biography of him fails to mention his saying that God does not throw dice. He was indeed given to such utterances (as I know from experience), and stronger ones, such as ‘It seems hard to look in God’s cards. But I cannot for a moment believe that He plays dice and makes use of “telepathic” means (as the current quantum theory alleges He does)’ [E1]. However, remarks such as these should not create the impression that Einstein had abandoned active interest in quantum problems in favor of his quest for a unified field theory. Far from it. In fact, even in the search for a unified theory, the quantum riddles were very much on his mind, as I shall discuss in Chapter

•Aug 25, 2005•0 citations

Solution to David Chalmers's "Hard Problem"

Jack Sarfatti, Arik Shimansky

A completely non-statistical non-linear non-unitary framework in which "God does not play dice ..." (Einstein) that describes the physical foundations of consciousness is presented for the first time. At its core is the insight that the missing link between current physical descriptions of reality and a credible physical framework for consciousness is provided by post-quantum mechanics (PQM): the extension of statistical linear unitary quantum mechanics for closed systems to a locally-retrocausal[i] non-statistical non-linear non-unitary theory for open systems through the introduction of a back-reaction potential and its implications. PQM is to orthodox QM as General Relativity (GR) is to Special Relativity (SR). PQM and GR both share the same metaphysical organizing principle that one-way actions without a compensating reaction or back-reaction means an incompleteness in the theoretical model leaving out important physical phenomena. We gleaned the final piece in the puzzle of how consciousness arises from the material world from a result relating to long range collective excitations in microtubules described by Stuart Hameroff in a recent Fetzer Foundation conference in London. Herbert Fröhlich suggested that almost any many-particle system when properly pumped far off thermodynamic equilibrium can be put into a robust macro-quantum coherent state immune from environmental decoherence. Indeed, we suggest that all life forms are an example of Frohlich coherence that is intimately connected with locally-retrocausal PQM back-reaction's violation of the de Broglie guidance equation that was assumed by Bohm in his 1952 pilot wave theory. Using nature as a guide combined with nano-technology points the way to the construction of naturally conscious artificial intelligence machines capable of hacking into current-day quantum cryptographic networks. Furthermore, one can imagine attaining the transhumanist agenda. For example, the consciousness of a genius like Stephen Hawking could be uploaded to the post-quantum Cloud and then downloaded to a healthy body or android.

Cosmos and history•Dec 1, 2018•1 citation

Concerning Dice and Divinity

D. M. Appleby

Einstein initially objected to the probabilistic aspect of quantum mechanics—the idea that God is playing at dice. Later he changed his ground, and focussed instead on the point that the Copenhagen Interpretation leads to what Einstein saw as the abandonment of physical realism. We argue here that Einstein’s initial intuition was perfectly sound, and that it is precisely the fact that quantum mechanics is a fundamentally probabilistic theory which is at the root of all the controversies regarding its interpretation. Probability is an intrinsically logical concept. This means that the quantum state has an essentially logical significance. It is extremely difficult to reconcile that fact with Einstein’s belief, that it is the task of physics to give us a vision of the world apprehended sub specie aeternitatis. Quantum mechanics thus presents us with a simple choice: either to follow Einstein in looking for a theory which is not probabilistic at the fundamental level, or else to accept that physics does not in fact put us in the position of God looking down on things from above. There is a widespread fear that the latter alternative must inevitably lead to a greatly impoverished, positivistic view of physical theory. It appears to us, however, that the truth is just the opposite. The Einsteinian vision is much less attractive than it seems at first sight. In particular, it is closely connected with philosophical reductionism.

arXiv:quant-ph/0611261•AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2007•4 citations

CONCERNING DICE AND DIVINITY

D M Appleby

Einstein initially objected to the probabilistic aspect of quantum mechanics— the idea that God is playing at dice. Later he changed his ground, and focussed instead on the point that the Copenhagen Interpretation leads to what Einstein saw as the abandonment of physical realism. We argue here that Einstein’s initial intuition was perfectly sound, and that it is precisely the fact that quantum mechanics is a fundamentally probabilistic theory which is at the root of all the controversies regarding its interpretation. Probability is an intrinsically logical concept. This means that the quantum state has an essentially logical significance. It is extremely difficult to reconcile that fact with Einstein’s belief, that it is the task of physics to give us a vision of the world apprehended sub specie aeternitatis. Quantum mechanics thus presents us with a simple choice: either to follow Einstein in looking for a theory which is not probabilistic at the fundamental level, or else to accept that physics does not in fact put us in the position of God looking down on things from above. There is a widespread fear that the latter alternative must inevitably lead to a greatly impoverished,

•Jan 1, 2006•5 citations

Minds and values in the quantum universe

Henry Pierce Stapp

Copenhagen is the perfect setting for our discussion of matter and information. We have been charged ‘to explore the current concept of matter from scientific, philosophical, and theological perspectives’. The essential foundation for this work is the output of the intense intellectual struggles that took place here in Copenhagen during the twenties, principally between Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg, and Wolfgang Pauli. Those struggles replaced the then-prevailing Newtonian idea of matter as ‘solid, massy, hard, impenetrable, moveable particles’ with a new concept that allowed, and in fact demanded, entry into the laws governing the motion of matter of the consequences of decisions made by human subjects. This change in the laws swept away the meaningless billiard-ball universe, and replaced it with a universe in which we human beings, by means of our intentional effort, can make a difference in how the ‘matter’ in our bodies behaves. The role of mind in nature Unfortunately, most of the prevailing descriptions of quantum theory tend to emphasize puzzles and paradoxes in a way that makes philosophers, theologians, and even non-physicist scientists leery of actually using in any deep way the profound changes in our understanding of human beings in nature wrought by the quantum revolution. Yet, properly presented, quantum mechanics is thoroughly in line with our deep human intuitions. It is the 300 years of indoctrination with basically false ideas about how nature works that now makes puzzling a process that is completely in line with normal human intuition. I therefore begin with a non-paradox-laden description of the quantum universe and the place of our minds within it.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•May 15, 2014•2 citations

Dice and Divine Action

Karl Giberson

Abstract The world picture disclosed by classical physics, beginning with Kepler, Galileo, and Newton and continuing until the early part of the twentieth century, was increasingly deterministic. The prevailing metaphor was that of a clock: as a clock is wound up and runs in an entirely predictable way which can be known from its initial conditions, so the universe unfolds according to a deterministic plan. Such a universe, unfolding under the influence of forces so absolute they were called ‘laws’, appeared to have limited opportunity for divine action. The theological response to this world picture was deism: God created the world but it runs on its own. This world picture collapsed in the early twentieth century as quantum mechanics was discovered and developed into a central, if not the central, part of scientific understanding of physical reality. The quantum-mechanical world picture cannot be modelled after the gears, pulleys, and levers of the classical world: its irreducible constituent parts are more like tiny clouds than tiny gears. Furthermore, the behaviour of these smallest parts was discovered to be indeterministic, and eternally so until observed by a mind. The mysterious behaviour of quantum particles, which compose all reality, and the puzzling role of minds invited speculation that God may be acting through the natural order to influence events. Such divine action could exist entirely within the envelope of possibilities possessed by quantum particles and thus not require any disruption of the natural order.

Oxford University Press eBooks•Jun 9, 2021•0 citations
He states he is not so much interested in discovering “how God made the World” as in how our theories describe it and are interconnected, in search for a unitary vision between mind and matter. Endowed with a physical intuition faster than any calculation, he can shift with self-assurance from Cosmology to Information Theory, from Physics at Planck scale and non-locality Geometry to Neurocomputing. His models are E. Majorana, L. Landau, W. Heisenberg, R. Feynman e F. Dyson, but his Damascus road has been D. Bohm vision. As for him “God always quantizes, but does not play dice, at all”. Physics – he says - is a way of life. With a passionate love for culture and music, Ignazio Licata is one of the last natural philosopher, but his language is that of non-commutative geometries, path integrals and renormalization group.
NeuroQuantology | June 2013 | Volume 11 | Issue 2 | Page 277-288
Abstract Everyone familiar with modern physics knows that Einstein’s attitude regarding quantum mechanics was one of skepticism. No biography of him fails to mention his saying that God does not throw dice. He was indeed given to such utterances (as I know from experience), and stronger ones, such as ‘It seems hard to look in God’s cards. But I cannot for a moment believe that He plays dice and makes use of “telepathic” means (as the current quantum theory alleges He does)’ [E1]. However, remarks such as these should not create the impression that Einstein had abandoned active interest in quantum problems in favor of his quest for a unified field theory. Far from it. In fact, even in the search for a unified theory, the quantum riddles were very much on his mind, as I shall discuss in Chapter
A completely non-statistical non-linear non-unitary framework in which "God does not play dice ..." (Einstein) that describes the physical foundations of consciousness is presented for the first time. At its core is the insight that the missing link between current physical descriptions of reality and a credible physical framework for consciousness is provided by post-quantum mechanics (PQM): the extension of statistical linear unitary quantum mechanics for closed systems to a locally-retrocausal[i] non-statistical non-linear non-unitary theory for open systems through the introduction of a back-reaction potential and its implications. PQM is to orthodox QM as General Relativity (GR) is to Special Relativity (SR). PQM and GR both share the same metaphysical organizing principle that one-way actions without a compensating reaction or back-reaction means an incompleteness in the theoretical model leaving out important physical phenomena. We gleaned the final piece in the puzzle of how consciousness arises from the material world from a result relating to long range collective excitations in microtubules described by Stuart Hameroff in a recent Fetzer Foundation conference in London. Herbert Fröhlich suggested that almost any many-particle system when properly pumped far off thermodynamic equilibrium can be put into a robust macro-quantum coherent state immune from environmental decoherence. Indeed, we suggest that all life forms are an example of Frohlich coherence that is intimately connected with locally-retrocausal PQM back-reaction's violation of the de Broglie guidance equation that was assumed by Bohm in his 1952 pilot wave theory. Using nature as a guide combined with nano-technology points the way to the construction of naturally conscious artificial intelligence machines capable of hacking into current-day quantum cryptographic networks. Furthermore, one can imagine attaining the transhumanist agenda. For example, the consciousness of a genius like Stephen Hawking could be uploaded to the post-quantum Cloud and then downloaded to a healthy body or android.
Einstein initially objected to the probabilistic aspect of quantum mechanics—the idea that God is playing at dice. Later he changed his ground, and focussed instead on the point that the Copenhagen Interpretation leads to what Einstein saw as the abandonment of physical realism. We argue here that Einstein’s initial intuition was perfectly sound, and that it is precisely the fact that quantum mechanics is a fundamentally probabilistic theory which is at the root of all the controversies regarding its interpretation. Probability is an intrinsically logical concept. This means that the quantum state has an essentially logical significance. It is extremely difficult to reconcile that fact with Einstein’s belief, that it is the task of physics to give us a vision of the world apprehended sub specie aeternitatis. Quantum mechanics thus presents us with a simple choice: either to follow Einstein in looking for a theory which is not probabilistic at the fundamental level, or else to accept that physics does not in fact put us in the position of God looking down on things from above. There is a widespread fear that the latter alternative must inevitably lead to a greatly impoverished, positivistic view of physical theory. It appears to us, however, that the truth is just the opposite. The Einsteinian vision is much less attractive than it seems at first sight. In particular, it is closely connected with philosophical reductionism.
Einstein initially objected to the probabilistic aspect of quantum mechanics— the idea that God is playing at dice. Later he changed his ground, and focussed instead on the point that the Copenhagen Interpretation leads to what Einstein saw as the abandonment of physical realism. We argue here that Einstein’s initial intuition was perfectly sound, and that it is precisely the fact that quantum mechanics is a fundamentally probabilistic theory which is at the root of all the controversies regarding its interpretation. Probability is an intrinsically logical concept. This means that the quantum state has an essentially logical significance. It is extremely difficult to reconcile that fact with Einstein’s belief, that it is the task of physics to give us a vision of the world apprehended sub specie aeternitatis. Quantum mechanics thus presents us with a simple choice: either to follow Einstein in looking for a theory which is not probabilistic at the fundamental level, or else to accept that physics does not in fact put us in the position of God looking down on things from above. There is a widespread fear that the latter alternative must inevitably lead to a greatly impoverished,
Copenhagen is the perfect setting for our discussion of matter and information. We have been charged ‘to explore the current concept of matter from scientific, philosophical, and theological perspectives’. The essential foundation for this work is the output of the intense intellectual struggles that took place here in Copenhagen during the twenties, principally between Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg, and Wolfgang Pauli. Those struggles replaced the then-prevailing Newtonian idea of matter as ‘solid, massy, hard, impenetrable, moveable particles’ with a new concept that allowed, and in fact demanded, entry into the laws governing the motion of matter of the consequences of decisions made by human subjects. This change in the laws swept away the meaningless billiard-ball universe, and replaced it with a universe in which we human beings, by means of our intentional effort, can make a difference in how the ‘matter’ in our bodies behaves. The role of mind in nature Unfortunately, most of the prevailing descriptions of quantum theory tend to emphasize puzzles and paradoxes in a way that makes philosophers, theologians, and even non-physicist scientists leery of actually using in any deep way the profound changes in our understanding of human beings in nature wrought by the quantum revolution. Yet, properly presented, quantum mechanics is thoroughly in line with our deep human intuitions. It is the 300 years of indoctrination with basically false ideas about how nature works that now makes puzzling a process that is completely in line with normal human intuition. I therefore begin with a non-paradox-laden description of the quantum universe and the place of our minds within it.
Abstract The world picture disclosed by classical physics, beginning with Kepler, Galileo, and Newton and continuing until the early part of the twentieth century, was increasingly deterministic. The prevailing metaphor was that of a clock: as a clock is wound up and runs in an entirely predictable way which can be known from its initial conditions, so the universe unfolds according to a deterministic plan. Such a universe, unfolding under the influence of forces so absolute they were called ‘laws’, appeared to have limited opportunity for divine action. The theological response to this world picture was deism: God created the world but it runs on its own. This world picture collapsed in the early twentieth century as quantum mechanics was discovered and developed into a central, if not the central, part of scientific understanding of physical reality. The quantum-mechanical world picture cannot be modelled after the gears, pulleys, and levers of the classical world: its irreducible constituent parts are more like tiny clouds than tiny gears. Furthermore, the behaviour of these smallest parts was discovered to be indeterministic, and eternally so until observed by a mind. The mysterious behaviour of quantum particles, which compose all reality, and the puzzling role of minds invited speculation that God may be acting through the natural order to influence events. Such divine action could exist entirely within the envelope of possibilities possessed by quantum particles and thus not require any disruption of the natural order.