We describe the concept of complementarity and argue that it is a useful concept for consciousness and other studies at the interface of conscious phenomena and physical reality. After outlining the history and source of the concept within psychology, we describe its place as a working hypothesis for the mind-brain problem. We then point out that generalized quantum non-locality could be of importance even for macroscopic objects. If this is so, complementarity would be the key-concept to understand EPR-like correlated systems.
We describe the concept of complementarity and argue that it is a useful concept for consciousness and other studies at the interface of conscious phenomena and physical reality. After outlining the history and source of the concept within psychology, we describe its place as a working hypothesis for the mind-brain problem. We then point out that generalized quantum non-locality could be of importance even for macroscopic objects. If this is so, complementarity would be the key-concept to understand EPR-like correlated systems.
Central to quantum theory is the concept of complementarity. In this essay, we argue that complementarity is also central to the emerging field of quantum cognition. We review the concept, its historical roots in psychology, and its development in quantum physics and offer examples of how it can be used to understand human cognition. The concept of complementarity provides a valuable and fresh perspective for organizing human cognitive phenomena and for understanding the nature of measurements in psychology. In turn, psychology can provide valuable new evidence and theoretical ideas to enrich this important scientific concept.
Abstract This article explores one of the profound complementarities in quantum physics and psychology: the reflexive nature of observation both on the objective (physics) and the subjective (psychological) side. It seeks to provide a logical chain of evidence from quantum mechanics to quantum effects in biological systems, to quantum effects in neurological systems. It then discusses the implications for psychology and pedagogy. Should quantum theory become the dominant paradigm for explaining consciousness, the implications for psychology are profound indeed. However, neuroplasticity, whether explained by classical or quantum effects, has already launched a revolution in our understanding of how changing one's intentions and thoughts affects both behavior and the brain.
In 1929 Szilard pointed out that the physics of the observer may play a role in the analysis of experiments. The same year, Bohr pointed out that complementarity appears to arise naturally in psychology where both the objects of perception and the perceiving subject belong to 'our mental content'. Here we argue that the formalism of quantum theory can be derived from two related intuitive principles: (i) inference is a physical process performed by physical systems, observers, which are part of the experimental setup---this implies non-commutativity and imaginary-time quantum mechanics; (ii) experiments must be described from a first-person perspective---this leads to self-reference, complementarity, and real-time quantum dynamics. This approach sheds new light on the foundations of quantum theory and suggests fundamental equations in physics are typically of second order due to the physical nature of the observer. It also suggests some experimental conjectures: (i) the quantum of action could be understood as the result of the additional energy required to transition from unconscious to conscious perception; (ii) humans can observe a single photon of visible light; (iii) self-aware systems and the neural correlates of the self should be composed of two complementary sub-systems, much like the DNA molecule is composed of two strands---this may help explain the double-hemisphere architecture of the brain. Moreover, this approach may help bridge the gap between science and human experience. We discuss the potential implications of these ideas for the modern research programs on consciousness and contemplative science. As side results: (i) we show that message-passing algorithms and stochastic processes can be written in a quantum-like manner; (ii) we provide evidence that non-stoquasticity, a quantum computational resource, may be related to non-equilibrium phenomena.
Overwhelming empirical evidence suggests that consciousness may be fundamentally linked to properties of physical systems. Quantum coherence in biological molecules, as well as entangled states of macroscopic objects such as brains, are important examples that support this notion. If we consider the quantum effects that seem most relevant to biology (e.g., coherence, entanglement, superposition), does it become feasible to identify general rules for observing biological function arising from processes associated with quantum mechanics? What implications would follow if a scientific theory were formulated to describe the interplay between brain functioning and quantum uncertainty? Such a framework will require additional postulates on the nature of quantum interactions in condensed phase systems. One challenge for present day theorists is whether and how classical and quantum mechanics may ultimately provide an integrated description of physics. This article will explore the issues related to quantum theory's ability to address mind-body phenomena and their connection to consciousness.
The existence of quantum correlates of consciousness (QCC) is doubtful from a scientific perspective. But even if their existence were verified, philosophical problems would remain. On the other hand, there could be more to QCC than meets the sceptic's eye: • QCC might be useful or even necessary for a better understanding of conscious experience or quantum physics or both. The main reasons for this are: the measurement problem (the nature of observation, the mysterious collapse of the wave function, etc.), ostensibly shared features of quantum phenomena and conscious phenomena (e.g., complementarity, nonspatiality, acausality, spontaneity, and holism) and connections (ontology, causation, and knowledge), the qualia problem (subjectivity, explanatory gap etc.). But there are many problems, especially questions regarding realism and the nature and role of conscious observers; • QCC are conceptually challenging, because there are definitory problems and some crucial ontological and epistemological shortcomings. It is instructive to compare them with recent proposals for understanding neural correlates of consciousness (NCC). QCC are not sufficient for a quantum theory of mind, nor might they be necessary except perhaps in a very broad sense; • QCC are also empirically challenging. Nevertheless, QCC could be relevant and important for the mindbody problem: QCC might reveal features that are necessary at least for behavioral manifestations of human consciousness. But QCC are compatible with very different proposals for a solution of the mind-body problem. This seems to be both advantageous and detrimental. QCC restrict accounts of nomological identity. The discovery of QCC cannot establish a naturalistic theory of mind alone. But there are also problems with QCC in the framework of other ontologies.
The nature and idea of consciousness is very mysterious and has profound importance, with existential, medical and spiritual implications and productivity. Behavior and functioning of the brain or, in other words, material brain activity is in some way correlated to the consciousness or mental activity. Since it is the most fundamental theory about the matter that is currently available, in efforts to understand the consciousness we can assume that the Quantum theory can be helpful. Various steps and studies have been carried out to achieve the extent of relation of quantum theory to the different neurophysiological levels of descriptions. In past and in current scenario efforts have been made to adopt quantum theory in different ways that correlate it to consciousness. The concept that this is solely a quantum effect and does not work for a classical case is also discussed. Researchers studied this about the notorious puzzles and contradiction of quantum mechanics, the theory physicists use to describe the tiniest objects in the Universe.