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

Cambridge University Press eBooks

Quantum Mechanics and Experience

Shan Gao

Published Jan 1, 2017• 0 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1017/9781316407479.002

Related papers

Quantum mechanics and experience

Dennis Dieks

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A•Dec 1, 1993•179 citations

The quantization of the Higgs’ condensate implies the falsification of quantum mechanics: the two-slit diffraction experiment

Jiří Souček

Using two reasonable "physical" hypotheses we obtain that quantum mechanics (QM) can be false on short distances. We propose also the corresponding two-slit diffraction experiment which can empirically prove the falsity of QM.

Journal of Physics Conference Series•Apr 1, 2019•0 citations

Quantum Mechanics and the Consistency of Conscious Experience

Michael Silberstein, W. M. Stuckey

We discuss the implications for the determinateness and intersubjective consistency of conscious experience in two gedanken experiments from quantum mechanics (QM). In particular, we discuss Wigner's friend and the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment with a twist. These are both cases (experiments) where quantum phenomena, or at least allegedly possible quantum phenomena/experiments, and the content/efficacy of conscious experience seem to bear on one another. We discuss why these two cases raise concerns for the determinateness and intersubjective consistency of conscious experience. We outline a 4D-global constraint-based approach to explanation in general and for QM in particular that resolves any such concerns without having to invoke metaphysical quietism (as with pragmatic accounts of QM), objective collapse mechanisms or subjective collapse. In short, we provide an account of QM free from any concerns associated with either the standard formalism or relative-state formalism, an account that yields a single 4D block universe with determinate and intersubjectively consistent conscious experience for all conscious agents. Essentially, the mystery in both experiments is caused by a dynamical/causal view of QM, e.g., time-evolved states in Hilbert space, and as we show this mystery can be avoided by a spatiotemporal, constraint-based view of QM, e.g., path integral calculation of probability amplitudes using future boundary conditions. What will become clear is that rather than furiously seeking some way to make dubious deep connections between quantum physics and conscious experience, the kinds of 4D adynamical global constraints that are fundamental to both classical and quantum physics and the relationship between them, also constrain conscious experience. That is, physics properly understood, already is psychology.

•Jan 28, 2019•2 citations

Quantum mechanics and reality

Bryce Seligman DeWitt

Princeton University Press eBooks•Mar 25, 2025•16 citations

Bhomian Mechanics vs. Standard Quantum Mechanics: a Difference in Experimental Predictions

Artur Szczepański

Standard Quantum Mechanics (QM) predicts an anti-intuitive fenomenon here referred to as "quantum autoscattering", which is excluded by Bhomian Mechanics. The scheme of a gedanken experiment testing the QM prediction is briefly discussed.

arXiv:1002.1568•Feb 8, 2010•0 citations

Quantum Mechanics and Reality

Princeton University Press eBooks•Jan 12, 2021•31 citations
We discuss the implications for the determinateness and intersubjective consistency of conscious experience in two gedanken experiments from quantum mechanics (QM). In particular, we discuss Wigner's friend and the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment with a twist. These are both cases (experiments) where quantum phenomena, or at least allegedly possible quantum phenomena/experiments, and the content/efficacy of conscious experience seem to bear on one another. We discuss why these two cases raise concerns for the determinateness and intersubjective consistency of conscious experience. We outline a 4D-global constraint-based approach to explanation in general and for QM in particular that resolves any such concerns without having to invoke metaphysical quietism (as with pragmatic accounts of QM), objective collapse mechanisms or subjective collapse. In short, we provide an account of QM free from any concerns associated with either the standard formalism or relative-state formalism, an account that yields a single 4D block universe with determinate and intersubjectively consistent conscious experience for all conscious agents. Essentially, the mystery in both experiments is caused by a dynamical/causal view of QM, e.g., time-evolved states in Hilbert space, and as we show this mystery can be avoided by a spatiotemporal, constraint-based view of QM, e.g., path integral calculation of probability amplitudes using future boundary conditions. What will become clear is that rather than furiously seeking some way to make dubious deep connections between quantum physics and conscious experience, the kinds of 4D adynamical global constraints that are fundamental to both classical and quantum physics and the relationship between them, also constrain conscious experience. That is, physics properly understood, already is psychology.