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

Journal of Consciousness Studies

Creative Choice How the Mind could Causally Affect the Brain

Peter Ryser

Published Jan 1, 2010• 1 citation
OpenAlex

Abstract

Abstract: In this paper a new interactionistic model of mental causa-tion is developed. By analysing the results of physics and neurosci-ence it is shown that the macroscopic cerebral activity and the resulting behavioural output is not strictly determined. This opens up the possibility that a non-physical mind can influence which of the physically allowed brain states is realised. Most models of mental causation postulate that there are coherent quantum states in the brain which could be influenced by a local mind-brain interaction. Due to environmental decoherence, however, it is questionable whether coherent quantum states can exist in the warm and wet brain. The here presented ‘creative choice theory’solves the problem of envi-ronmental decoherence by including the environment. The whole uni-verse is considered as a quantum system that is in superposition of alternative realities. It is then assumed that a universal mind col-lapses the universal wave-function whilst individual minds (as part of the universal mind) interact with individual brains. This leads to a holistic model of reality that could also provide an explanation for ESP-phenomena and mystical experiences. 1.

Related papers

Quantum Physics in Neuroscience and Psychology: A New Theory With Respect to Mind/Brain Interaction

Jeffrey M. Schwartz, Henry Pierce Stapp, M. Beauregard

The cognitive frame in which most neuropsychological research on the neural basis of behavior is conducted contains the assumption that brain mechanisms per se fully suffice to explain all psychologically described phenomena. This assumption stems from the idea that the brain is made up entirely of material particles and fields, and that all causal mechanisms must therefore be formulated solely in terms of properties of these elements. One consequence of this stance is that psychological terms having intrinsic mentalistic and/or experiential content (terms such as "feeling," "knowing," and "effort") have not been included as primary causal factors in neuropsychological research: insofar as properties are not described in material terms they are deemed irrelevant to the causal mechanisms underlying brain function. However, the origin of this demand that experiential realities be excluded from the causal base is a theory of nature that has been known for more that three quarters of a century to be fundamentally incorrect. It is explained here why it is consequently scientifically unwarranted to assume that material factors alone can in principle explain all causal mechanisms relevant to neuroscience. More importantly, it is explained how a key quantum effect can be introduced into brain dynamics in a simple and practical way that provides a rationally coherent, causally formulated, physics-based way of understanding and using the psychological and physical data derived from the growing set of studies of the capacity of directed attention and mental effort to systematically alter brain function.

arXiv:q-bio/0401019•Jan 14, 2004•5 citations

A proposed mechanism for mind-brain interaction using extended Bohmian quantum mechanics in Avicenna's monotheistic perspective

Mohammad Vahid Jamali, Mehdi Golshani, Yousef Jamali

In quantum approaches to consciousness, the authors try to propose a model and mechanism for the mind-brain interaction using modern physics and some quantum concepts which do not exist in the classical physics. The independent effect of mind on the brain has been one of the challenging issues in the history of science and philosophy. In some recent mind-brain interaction models, the direct influence of mind on matter is either not accepted (as in Stapp's model) or not clear, and there have not been any clear mechanism for it (as in Penrose-Hameroff's model or in Eccles's model). In this manuscript we propose a model and mechanism for mind's effect on the matter using an extended Bohmian quantum mechanics and Avicenna's ideas. We show that mind and mental states can affect brain's activity without any violation of physical laws. This is a mathematical and descriptive model which shows the possibility of providing a causal model for mind's effect on matter. It is shown that this model guarantees the realistic philosophical constraints and respects the laws of nature. In addition, it is shown that it is in agreement with the Libet style experimental results and parapsychological data. To propose this model, we obtained a modified (non-unitary) Schrödinger equation via second quantization method which affects the particle through a modified quantum potential and a new term in the continuity equation. At the second quantized level, which is equivalent to quantum field theory level (QFT), we can use the path integral formalism of Feynman. We show that there are three methods to extend Bohmian QM via path integral formalism, which has different interpretations. By numerical simulation of trajectories in the two-slits experiment, we show their differences and choose one of these methods for our mind-brain model which can be the basis for explaining some phenomena which are not possible to explain in the standard Bohmian QM.

arXiv:2006.08459•Heliyon•Jul 1, 2019•10 citations

Quantum physics in neuroscience and psychology: a neurophysical model of mind–brain interaction

Jeffrey M. Schwartz, Henry Pierce Stapp, Mario Beauregard

Neuropsychological research on the neural basis of behaviour generally posits that brain mechanisms will ultimately suffice to explain all psychologically described phenomena. This assumption stems from the idea that the brain is made up entirely of material particles and fields, and that all causal mechanisms relevant to neuroscience can therefore be formulated solely in terms of properties of these elements. Thus, terms having intrinsic mentalistic and/or experiential content (e.g. 'feeling', 'knowing' and 'effort') are not included as primary causal factors. This theoretical restriction is motivated primarily by ideas about the natural world that have been known to be fundamentally incorrect for more than three-quarters of a century. Contemporary basic physical theory differs profoundly from classic physics on the important matter of how the consciousness of human agents enters into the structure of empirical phenomena. The new principles contradict the older idea that local mechanical processes alone can account for the structure of all observed empirical data. Contemporary physical theory brings directly and irreducibly into the overall causal structure certain psychologically described choices made by human agents about how they will act. This key development in basic physical theory is applicable to neuroscience, and it provides neuroscientists and psychologists with an alternative conceptual framework for describing neural processes. Indeed, owing to certain structural features of ion channels critical to synaptic function, contemporary physical theory must in principle be used when analysing human brain dynamics. The new framework, unlike its classic-physics-based predecessor, is erected directly upon, and is compatible with, the prevailing principles of physics. It is able to represent more adequately than classic concepts the neuroplastic mechanisms relevant to the growing number of empirical studies of the capacity of directed attention and mental effort to systematically alter brain function.

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences•Jun 29, 2005•305 citations

Quantum physics in neuroscience and psychology: A neurophysical model o f mind/brain interaction

Henry Pierce Stapp, Jeffrey M. Schwartz, Mario Beauregard

Contemporary physical theory brings directly and irreducibly into the overall causal structure certain psychologically described choices made by human beings about how they will act. This key development in basic physical theory is applicable to neuroscience, and it provides neuroscientists and psychologists with an alternative conceptual structure for describing neural processes.

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory•Jun 1, 2004•7 citations

The Quantum Mind/Classical Brain Problem

Alfredo Pereira

The quantum theory of mind allows a shift from the Mind/Brain metaphysical problem to the Quantum Mind/Classical Brain scientific problem: how could systematic and coherent quantum processes - assumed to be the physical support of our conscious experiences - occur in a macroscopic system as the brain? I discuss a solution based on a neurobiological model that attributes to quantum computation in intra-neuronal signal-transduction pathways the role of directly supporting phenomenal experience. In this model, quantum coherence is created or prepared by classical mechanisms as recurrent neuronal networks, oscillatory synchrony and gated membrane channels, thus avoiding common theoretical constraints for the existence of quantum communication and computation, as ultra-cold temperatures and quasi-isolation from the environment.

NeuroQuantology•Sep 3, 2007•16 citations

Consciousness, Causality, and Quantum Physics

David Pratt

Quantum theory is open to different interpretations, and this paper reviews some of the points of contention. The standard interpretation of quantum physics assumes that the quantum world is characterized by absolute indeterminism and that quantum systems exist objectively only when they are being measured or observed. David Bohm's ontological interpretation of quantum theory rejects both these assumptions. Bohm's theory that quantum events are party determined by subtler forces operating at deeper levels of reality ties in with John Eccles ' theory that our minds exist outside the material world and interact with our brains at the quantum level. Paranormal phenomena indicate that our minds can communicate with other minds and affect distant physical systems by nonordinary means. Whether such phenomena can be adequately explained in terms of nonlocality and the quantum vacuum or whether they involve superphysical forces and states of matter as yet unknown to science is still an open question, and one which merits further experimental study.

NeuroQuantology•Sep 3, 2007•17 citations
Abstract: In this paper a new interactionistic model of mental causa-tion is developed. By analysing the results of physics and neurosci-ence it is shown that the macroscopic cerebral activity and the resulting behavioural output is not strictly determined. This opens up the possibility that a non-physical mind can influence which of the physically allowed brain states is realised. Most models of mental causation postulate that there are coherent quantum states in the brain which could be influenced by a local mind-brain interaction. Due to environmental decoherence, however, it is questionable whether coherent quantum states can exist in the warm and wet brain. The here presented ‘creative choice theory’solves the problem of envi-ronmental decoherence by including the environment. The whole uni-verse is considered as a quantum system that is in superposition of alternative realities. It is then assumed that a universal mind col-lapses the universal wave-function whilst individual minds (as part of the universal mind) interact with individual brains. This leads to a holistic model of reality that could also provide an explanation for ESP-phenomena and mystical experiences. 1.
The cognitive frame in which most neuropsychological research on the neural basis of behavior is conducted contains the assumption that brain mechanisms per se fully suffice to explain all psychologically described phenomena. This assumption stems from the idea that the brain is made up entirely of material particles and fields, and that all causal mechanisms must therefore be formulated solely in terms of properties of these elements. One consequence of this stance is that psychological terms having intrinsic mentalistic and/or experiential content (terms such as "feeling," "knowing," and "effort") have not been included as primary causal factors in neuropsychological research: insofar as properties are not described in material terms they are deemed irrelevant to the causal mechanisms underlying brain function. However, the origin of this demand that experiential realities be excluded from the causal base is a theory of nature that has been known for more that three quarters of a century to be fundamentally incorrect. It is explained here why it is consequently scientifically unwarranted to assume that material factors alone can in principle explain all causal mechanisms relevant to neuroscience. More importantly, it is explained how a key quantum effect can be introduced into brain dynamics in a simple and practical way that provides a rationally coherent, causally formulated, physics-based way of understanding and using the psychological and physical data derived from the growing set of studies of the capacity of directed attention and mental effort to systematically alter brain function.
In quantum approaches to consciousness, the authors try to propose a model and mechanism for the mind-brain interaction using modern physics and some quantum concepts which do not exist in the classical physics. The independent effect of mind on the brain has been one of the challenging issues in the history of science and philosophy. In some recent mind-brain interaction models, the direct influence of mind on matter is either not accepted (as in Stapp's model) or not clear, and there have not been any clear mechanism for it (as in Penrose-Hameroff's model or in Eccles's model). In this manuscript we propose a model and mechanism for mind's effect on the matter using an extended Bohmian quantum mechanics and Avicenna's ideas. We show that mind and mental states can affect brain's activity without any violation of physical laws. This is a mathematical and descriptive model which shows the possibility of providing a causal model for mind's effect on matter. It is shown that this model guarantees the realistic philosophical constraints and respects the laws of nature. In addition, it is shown that it is in agreement with the Libet style experimental results and parapsychological data. To propose this model, we obtained a modified (non-unitary) Schrödinger equation via second quantization method which affects the particle through a modified quantum potential and a new term in the continuity equation. At the second quantized level, which is equivalent to quantum field theory level (QFT), we can use the path integral formalism of Feynman. We show that there are three methods to extend Bohmian QM via path integral formalism, which has different interpretations. By numerical simulation of trajectories in the two-slits experiment, we show their differences and choose one of these methods for our mind-brain model which can be the basis for explaining some phenomena which are not possible to explain in the standard Bohmian QM.
Neuropsychological research on the neural basis of behaviour generally posits that brain mechanisms will ultimately suffice to explain all psychologically described phenomena. This assumption stems from the idea that the brain is made up entirely of material particles and fields, and that all causal mechanisms relevant to neuroscience can therefore be formulated solely in terms of properties of these elements. Thus, terms having intrinsic mentalistic and/or experiential content (e.g. 'feeling', 'knowing' and 'effort') are not included as primary causal factors. This theoretical restriction is motivated primarily by ideas about the natural world that have been known to be fundamentally incorrect for more than three-quarters of a century. Contemporary basic physical theory differs profoundly from classic physics on the important matter of how the consciousness of human agents enters into the structure of empirical phenomena. The new principles contradict the older idea that local mechanical processes alone can account for the structure of all observed empirical data. Contemporary physical theory brings directly and irreducibly into the overall causal structure certain psychologically described choices made by human agents about how they will act. This key development in basic physical theory is applicable to neuroscience, and it provides neuroscientists and psychologists with an alternative conceptual framework for describing neural processes. Indeed, owing to certain structural features of ion channels critical to synaptic function, contemporary physical theory must in principle be used when analysing human brain dynamics. The new framework, unlike its classic-physics-based predecessor, is erected directly upon, and is compatible with, the prevailing principles of physics. It is able to represent more adequately than classic concepts the neuroplastic mechanisms relevant to the growing number of empirical studies of the capacity of directed attention and mental effort to systematically alter brain function.
The quantum theory of mind allows a shift from the Mind/Brain metaphysical problem to the Quantum Mind/Classical Brain scientific problem: how could systematic and coherent quantum processes - assumed to be the physical support of our conscious experiences - occur in a macroscopic system as the brain? I discuss a solution based on a neurobiological model that attributes to quantum computation in intra-neuronal signal-transduction pathways the role of directly supporting phenomenal experience. In this model, quantum coherence is created or prepared by classical mechanisms as recurrent neuronal networks, oscillatory synchrony and gated membrane channels, thus avoiding common theoretical constraints for the existence of quantum communication and computation, as ultra-cold temperatures and quasi-isolation from the environment.
Quantum theory is open to different interpretations, and this paper reviews some of the points of contention. The standard interpretation of quantum physics assumes that the quantum world is characterized by absolute indeterminism and that quantum systems exist objectively only when they are being measured or observed. David Bohm's ontological interpretation of quantum theory rejects both these assumptions. Bohm's theory that quantum events are party determined by subtler forces operating at deeper levels of reality ties in with John Eccles ' theory that our minds exist outside the material world and interact with our brains at the quantum level. Paranormal phenomena indicate that our minds can communicate with other minds and affect distant physical systems by nonordinary means. Whether such phenomena can be adequately explained in terms of nonlocality and the quantum vacuum or whether they involve superphysical forces and states of matter as yet unknown to science is still an open question, and one which merits further experimental study.