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

On the possible role of quantum phenomena in normal and abnormal mental function.

Andrew H. Szentgyorgyi

Published Jan 1, 1962• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Related papers

Quantum Theory and Mental Phenomena

Thomas G. Schumann

Physics Essays•Dec 1, 2000•2 citations

Quantum Mechanics Requires an Observer Context Distinguishing between Reality and its Mental Representation

Franz Klaus Jansen

When phenomena in quantum mechanics are interpreted from the perspective of bio-psychology, wave function collapse from several to a single eigenstate must be plausibly explained. Quantum mechanics requires a context, yet the context of an observer is rarely considered. On the other hand, in bio-psychology, the observer context is examined to explain superposition and collapse by different mental functions used in everyday life. Three mental functions are described, one of which is responsible for observation, and the others for conservation and treatment of information in mental representation. Whereas observation produces information with certainty, the subsequent processes result in uncertain potentiality. In order to encompass uncertainty, multiple possibilities are simultaneously considered in mental superposition, one of which should represent the unknown future outcome. During observation, all suggested potentialities necessarily collapse to one real outcome. The collapse of superposition does not occur in observable physical reality, but in its mental representation. Some physical principles—such as superposition, infinity and nothingness before the Big Bang—are pure phenomena of mental representation, which will always remain unverifiable by observation. This argument proves that mental representation brought about by the observer context participates in the production of mental models for the best approximation of physical reality.

•Feb 8, 2018•1 citation

Quantum Theory and the Mind

University of Notre Dame Press eBooks•Feb 28, 2003•0 citations

Проблема сознания и квантовые модели психики

Aleksandr Bukalov

It is a review of the theories for mentality and consciousness. The holographic model of thinking including mental functions by C. G. Jung–A.Augustinuvichute is proposed. It is shown that neural structures cannot provide observable mental phenomena and a consciousness phenomenon. The quantum model of a physical substratum of the mentality, consisting from boze- and a fermi-condensate of easy fundamental particles, is desctibed. Studying of the quantum base of consciousness will give the chance to create new quantum computers, under the performances coming nearer to possibilities of human thinking.

Психология и соционика межличностных отношений•Jan 1, 2016•0 citations

Quantum Theory and the Mind

Jeremy Butterfield, Gordon N. Fleming

Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume•Jul 1, 1995•42 citations

Quantum Mechanics Requires an Observer Context Distinguishing Between Reality and its Mental Representation

Franz Klaus Jansen

When phenomena in quantum mechanics are interpreted from the perspective of bio-psychology, wave function collapse from several to a single eigenstate must be plausibly explained. Quantum mechanics requires a context, yet the context of an observer is rarely considered. On the other hand, in bio-psychology, the observer context is examined to explain superposition and collapse by different mental functions used in everyday life. Three mental functions are described, one of which is responsible for observation, and the others for conservation and treatment of information in mental representation. Whereas observation produces information with certainty, the subsequent processes result in information that remains uncertain potentiality. In order to encompass uncertainty, multiple possibilities are simultaneously considered in mental superposition, one of which should represent the unknown future outcome in observable reality. During verification by new observation, all suggested potentialities necessarily collapse to one real outcome. The collapse of superposition does not occur in observable physical reality, but in its mental representation. Some physical principles—such as superposition, infinity and nothingness before the Big Bang—are pure phenomena of mental representation, which will always remain unverifiable by observation. This argument proves that mental representation brought about by the observer context participates in the production of mental models for the best approximation of physical reality.

NeuroQuantology•Mar 21, 2018•3 citations
When phenomena in quantum mechanics are interpreted from the perspective of bio-psychology, wave function collapse from several to a single eigenstate must be plausibly explained. Quantum mechanics requires a context, yet the context of an observer is rarely considered. On the other hand, in bio-psychology, the observer context is examined to explain superposition and collapse by different mental functions used in everyday life. Three mental functions are described, one of which is responsible for observation, and the others for conservation and treatment of information in mental representation. Whereas observation produces information with certainty, the subsequent processes result in uncertain potentiality. In order to encompass uncertainty, multiple possibilities are simultaneously considered in mental superposition, one of which should represent the unknown future outcome. During observation, all suggested potentialities necessarily collapse to one real outcome. The collapse of superposition does not occur in observable physical reality, but in its mental representation. Some physical principles—such as superposition, infinity and nothingness before the Big Bang—are pure phenomena of mental representation, which will always remain unverifiable by observation. This argument proves that mental representation brought about by the observer context participates in the production of mental models for the best approximation of physical reality.
It is a review of the theories for mentality and consciousness. The holographic model of thinking including mental functions by C. G. Jung–A.Augustinuvichute is proposed. It is shown that neural structures cannot provide observable mental phenomena and a consciousness phenomenon. The quantum model of a physical substratum of the mentality, consisting from boze- and a fermi-condensate of easy fundamental particles, is desctibed. Studying of the quantum base of consciousness will give the chance to create new quantum computers, under the performances coming nearer to possibilities of human thinking.
When phenomena in quantum mechanics are interpreted from the perspective of bio-psychology, wave function collapse from several to a single eigenstate must be plausibly explained. Quantum mechanics requires a context, yet the context of an observer is rarely considered. On the other hand, in bio-psychology, the observer context is examined to explain superposition and collapse by different mental functions used in everyday life. Three mental functions are described, one of which is responsible for observation, and the others for conservation and treatment of information in mental representation. Whereas observation produces information with certainty, the subsequent processes result in information that remains uncertain potentiality. In order to encompass uncertainty, multiple possibilities are simultaneously considered in mental superposition, one of which should represent the unknown future outcome in observable reality. During verification by new observation, all suggested potentialities necessarily collapse to one real outcome. The collapse of superposition does not occur in observable physical reality, but in its mental representation. Some physical principles—such as superposition, infinity and nothingness before the Big Bang—are pure phenomena of mental representation, which will always remain unverifiable by observation. This argument proves that mental representation brought about by the observer context participates in the production of mental models for the best approximation of physical reality.