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

A Quantum Brain Version of the Quantum Bayesian Solution to the Measurement Problem

Gordon G. Globus

Published Sep 21, 2016• 1 citation
Publisher

Abstract

Quantum Bayesianism makes conventional assumptions about conscious experience and the world, which are “deconstructed” here. Conscious experience is succeeded by Heideggerian Existenz as world-thrownness. But unlike Heidegger, Existenz is conceived as a monadological dis-closure in the other-tuned, self-tuned and past-tuned “between” of the quantum thermo field brain’s dual mode vacuum state. The wave function is identified with Bayesian expectation conceived as the brain’s “self-tuning” capability subject to informative modification. Physical reality is never worldly but quantum at all scales. Worlds are disclosed only in monadological parallel in the quantum brain’s tuned between. This version of Quantum Bayesianism offers a novel solution to the measurement problem.

DOI
10.14704/nq.2017.15.1.996

Related papers

A Quantum Monadological Solution to the Measurement, Consciousness and Qualia Problems

Gordon G. Globus

The measurement, consciousness and qualia problematics are intertwined: all hinge on the failure to “deconstruct” world, consciousness and qualia. Physical reality is quantum at all scales, whereas world is dis-closed in parallel at unique addresses: thrown existence is monadological. Two categories of solution to the measurement problem are distinguished and analyzed: spontaneous decoherence theories and selection by match theories. A new interpretation of the Schrӧdinger wave function as representing the quantum brain’s “self-tuning” is proposed. Quantum neurophilosophy and neuroquantology within the framework of thermofield brain dynamics support an integrated solution to measurement, consciousness and qualia problems.

NeuroQuantology•May 13, 2014•1 citation

Bohr, Heidegger, The Unspeakable and Dis-Closure: An Exercise in Quantum Neurophilosophy

Gordon G. Globus

The problematic of world is considered within the horizon of Bohr and Heidegger’s surprisingly overlapping formulations of the “unspeakable.” The process of world dis-closure—thrown Existenz—is discussed in terms of dual mode quantum thermofield brain dynamics. Existence, which is sharply distinguished from consciousness, is “between-two.” NeuroQuantology | June 2013 | Volume 11 | Issue 2 | Page 171-180

NeuroQuantology•Jun 1, 2013•3 citations

Quantum Closures and Disclosures

Gordon G. Globus

Quantum Closures and Disclosures thinks together two seemingly irreconcilable discourses: An application of quantum field theory to brain functioning, called quantum brain dynamics, and the continental postphenomenological tradition, especially the work of Martin Heidegger and Jacques Derrida. Underlying both developments is a new ontology of nonCartesian dual modes whose rich provenance is their "between." World is disclosed in the lumen naturale of dual modes belonging-together in their between; all presencing is a function of a "~conjugate" form of match in the between. This surprising rapprochement between a powerful tradition within continental philosophy and the 20th-century quantum revolution in science is fruitfully applied to crucial issues in philosophy, brain science, mathematics and psychiatry. Related Titles: Quantum Brain Dynamics and Consciousness: An introduction, edited by Mari Jibu and Kunio Yasue (1995), and My Double Unveiled: The dissipative quantum model of the brain, by Giuseppe Vitiello (2001)

Advances in consciousness research•Apr 28, 2003•17 citations

The Mind-Brain Problem and the Measurement Paradox of Quantum Mechanics: Should We Disentangle Them?

Javier Sánchez Cañizares

In recent decades, progress in the field of neurosciences has triggered an interest in understanding mind-brain relationships. Quantum Mechanics (QM) has been present in the debate from its beginnings through the well-known measurement paradox. The standard interpretation of QM considers two basic, fundamentally irreducible, processes: the deterministic evolution of the wave-function according to the Schrodinger equation, once the initial conditions have been settled; and the indeterministic wave-function collapse into one of the possible outcomes, after performing a specific measurement. So, QM would point to the limits of a purely deterministic view of nature and, in particular, of brains. Nevertheless, QM’s relevance for the brain’s physics is still to be proven. Detractors of the QM influence are confident of the role of decoherent processes at different physical scales in order to ensure a classical deterministic behavior of the brain. However, little attention is paid to the epistemic implications of invoking decoherence for the mind-brain problem. In this paper, (i) we present lasting QM models stating a specific view of human consciousness and make explicit their position regarding the relationship between the physical activity of neurons and/or networks of neurons and the phenomenal conscious experience; (ii) we review the main criticisms of the relevance of QM in the brain and, most importantly, we bring out the philosophical implications behind the usual recourse to decoherence in the transition from the quantum to the classical world, explaining why the mind-brain problem and the measurement paradox should not be disentangled.

NeuroQuantology•Oct 30, 2013•2 citations

Quantum Closures and Disclosures: Thinking-together postphenomenology and quantum brain dynamics

Gordon G. Globus, Tere Vadén

Quantum Closures and Disclosures thinks together two seemingly irreconcilable discourses: An application of quantum field theory to brain functioning, called quantum brain dynamics, and the continental postphenomenological tradition, especially the work of Martin Heidegger and Jacques Derrida. Underlying both developments is a new ontology of nonCartesian dual modes whose rich provenance is their World is disclosed in the lumen naturale of dual modes belonging-together in their between; all presencing is a function of a ~conjugate form of match in the between. This surprising rapprochement between a powerful tradition within continental philosophy and the 20th-century quantum revolution in science is fruitfully applied to crucial issues in philosophy, brain science, mathematics and psychiatry. Related Titles: Quantum Brain Dynamics and Consciousness: An introduction , edited by Mari Jibu and Kunio Yasue (1995), and My Double Unveiled: The dissipative quantum model of the brain , by Giuseppe Vitiello (2001)

•Apr 28, 2003•35 citations

The Kantian-Bayesian Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics: A Cognitive Dissolution of the Measurement Problem

Shum, Tim Siu Ming

[Author’s Note (April 2026)]Supersession Notice: This 2025 paper explores the early KB-Flux framework. It has been structurally overhauled and formally superseded by “The Light & Flux (L&F) Framework (2026)”. While the 2025 version relies on cognitive metaphors—treating the wave function as a “generative model” —the 2026 L&F framework provides a rigorous mathematical proof deriving complex Hilbert space from finite-inference constraints. It replaces “phenomenal grammar” with the Simplex Projection (𐍀), grounded in metabolic and thermodynamic mandates. Researchers seeking the formal Non-Derivability Principle and a stratified three-tier ontology should refer to the 2026 version. Original AbstractReaders are advised to treat the present paper strictly as a historical record of the framework’s initial development. For the current, accurate formulation, please refer to the new publication.The measurement problem—why quantum superpositions yield definite outcomes upon observation—has persisted as the central interpretative challenge of quantum mechanics for nearly a century. This paper proposes that the problem dissolves when viewed through the joint lens of Kantian epistemology and predictive processing (Bayesian brain) theory. Drawing on Kant’s distinction between phenomena (experience) and noumena (reality-in-itself), we argue that the quantum wave function (Ψ) does not represent a physical field in the noumenal world, but rather the generative model of a prediction-generating cognitive agent. In this framework, "superposition" represents a state of uninitialized probabilistic expectation (Latent Space), while "collapse" is reinterpreted as a Bayesian belief update—the discrete transition from a probability distribution to a definite value, necessitated by the information-processing constraints of the observer. By treating the observer not as a passive witness but as an active inference engine, this framework: Naturalizes the collapse postulate: Measurement is the update of an internal model, not a physical discontinuity in nature. Resolves nested-observer paradoxes: Wigner's Friend is resolved by treating reality as a distributed system with eventual consistency, where distinct agents hold distinct local cache states. Grounds the Born Rule: We argue that the squared-amplitude probability rule ($P=|\Psi|^2$) serves as a transcendental constraint (akin to Gleason’s Theorem) required for the internal consistency of any probabilistic agent. This interpretation suggests that the "weirdness" of quantum mechanics reflects the necessary architectural constraints of any finite mind attempting to model an inaccessible reality, effectively treating physics as the "User Interface" of reality.

•Dec 12, 2025•0 citations
Quantum Bayesianism makes conventional assumptions about conscious experience and the world, which are “deconstructed” here. Conscious experience is succeeded by Heideggerian Existenz as world-thrownness. But unlike Heidegger, Existenz is conceived as a monadological dis-closure in the other-tuned, self-tuned and past-tuned “between” of the quantum thermo field brain’s dual mode vacuum state. The wave function is identified with Bayesian expectation conceived as the brain’s “self-tuning” capability subject to informative modification. Physical reality is never worldly but quantum at all scales. Worlds are disclosed only in monadological parallel in the quantum brain’s tuned between. This version of Quantum Bayesianism offers a novel solution to the measurement problem.
The measurement, consciousness and qualia problematics are intertwined: all hinge on the failure to “deconstruct” world, consciousness and qualia. Physical reality is quantum at all scales, whereas world is dis-closed in parallel at unique addresses: thrown existence is monadological. Two categories of solution to the measurement problem are distinguished and analyzed: spontaneous decoherence theories and selection by match theories. A new interpretation of the Schrӧdinger wave function as representing the quantum brain’s “self-tuning” is proposed. Quantum neurophilosophy and neuroquantology within the framework of thermofield brain dynamics support an integrated solution to measurement, consciousness and qualia problems.
Quantum Closures and Disclosures thinks together two seemingly irreconcilable discourses: An application of quantum field theory to brain functioning, called quantum brain dynamics, and the continental postphenomenological tradition, especially the work of Martin Heidegger and Jacques Derrida. Underlying both developments is a new ontology of nonCartesian dual modes whose rich provenance is their "between." World is disclosed in the lumen naturale of dual modes belonging-together in their between; all presencing is a function of a "~conjugate" form of match in the between. This surprising rapprochement between a powerful tradition within continental philosophy and the 20th-century quantum revolution in science is fruitfully applied to crucial issues in philosophy, brain science, mathematics and psychiatry. Related Titles: Quantum Brain Dynamics and Consciousness: An introduction, edited by Mari Jibu and Kunio Yasue (1995), and My Double Unveiled: The dissipative quantum model of the brain, by Giuseppe Vitiello (2001)
In recent decades, progress in the field of neurosciences has triggered an interest in understanding mind-brain relationships. Quantum Mechanics (QM) has been present in the debate from its beginnings through the well-known measurement paradox. The standard interpretation of QM considers two basic, fundamentally irreducible, processes: the deterministic evolution of the wave-function according to the Schrodinger equation, once the initial conditions have been settled; and the indeterministic wave-function collapse into one of the possible outcomes, after performing a specific measurement. So, QM would point to the limits of a purely deterministic view of nature and, in particular, of brains. Nevertheless, QM’s relevance for the brain’s physics is still to be proven. Detractors of the QM influence are confident of the role of decoherent processes at different physical scales in order to ensure a classical deterministic behavior of the brain. However, little attention is paid to the epistemic implications of invoking decoherence for the mind-brain problem. In this paper, (i) we present lasting QM models stating a specific view of human consciousness and make explicit their position regarding the relationship between the physical activity of neurons and/or networks of neurons and the phenomenal conscious experience; (ii) we review the main criticisms of the relevance of QM in the brain and, most importantly, we bring out the philosophical implications behind the usual recourse to decoherence in the transition from the quantum to the classical world, explaining why the mind-brain problem and the measurement paradox should not be disentangled.
Quantum Closures and Disclosures thinks together two seemingly irreconcilable discourses: An application of quantum field theory to brain functioning, called quantum brain dynamics, and the continental postphenomenological tradition, especially the work of Martin Heidegger and Jacques Derrida. Underlying both developments is a new ontology of nonCartesian dual modes whose rich provenance is their World is disclosed in the lumen naturale of dual modes belonging-together in their between; all presencing is a function of a ~conjugate form of match in the between. This surprising rapprochement between a powerful tradition within continental philosophy and the 20th-century quantum revolution in science is fruitfully applied to crucial issues in philosophy, brain science, mathematics and psychiatry. Related Titles: Quantum Brain Dynamics and Consciousness: An introduction , edited by Mari Jibu and Kunio Yasue (1995), and My Double Unveiled: The dissipative quantum model of the brain , by Giuseppe Vitiello (2001)
[Author’s Note (April 2026)]Supersession Notice: This 2025 paper explores the early KB-Flux framework. It has been structurally overhauled and formally superseded by “The Light & Flux (L&F) Framework (2026)”. While the 2025 version relies on cognitive metaphors—treating the wave function as a “generative model” —the 2026 L&F framework provides a rigorous mathematical proof deriving complex Hilbert space from finite-inference constraints. It replaces “phenomenal grammar” with the Simplex Projection (𐍀), grounded in metabolic and thermodynamic mandates. Researchers seeking the formal Non-Derivability Principle and a stratified three-tier ontology should refer to the 2026 version. Original AbstractReaders are advised to treat the present paper strictly as a historical record of the framework’s initial development. For the current, accurate formulation, please refer to the new publication.The measurement problem—why quantum superpositions yield definite outcomes upon observation—has persisted as the central interpretative challenge of quantum mechanics for nearly a century. This paper proposes that the problem dissolves when viewed through the joint lens of Kantian epistemology and predictive processing (Bayesian brain) theory. Drawing on Kant’s distinction between phenomena (experience) and noumena (reality-in-itself), we argue that the quantum wave function (Ψ) does not represent a physical field in the noumenal world, but rather the generative model of a prediction-generating cognitive agent. In this framework, "superposition" represents a state of uninitialized probabilistic expectation (Latent Space), while "collapse" is reinterpreted as a Bayesian belief update—the discrete transition from a probability distribution to a definite value, necessitated by the information-processing constraints of the observer. By treating the observer not as a passive witness but as an active inference engine, this framework: Naturalizes the collapse postulate: Measurement is the update of an internal model, not a physical discontinuity in nature. Resolves nested-observer paradoxes: Wigner's Friend is resolved by treating reality as a distributed system with eventual consistency, where distinct agents hold distinct local cache states. Grounds the Born Rule: We argue that the squared-amplitude probability rule (P=∣Ψ∣2P=|\Psi|^2P=∣Ψ∣2) serves as a transcendental constraint (akin to Gleason’s Theorem) required for the internal consistency of any probabilistic agent. This interpretation suggests that the "weirdness" of quantum mechanics reflects the necessary architectural constraints of any finite mind attempting to model an inaccessible reality, effectively treating physics as the "User Interface" of reality.