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.
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.
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.
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.
Neuropsychological research on the neural basis of behavior 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 classical 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, due to certain structural features of ion channels critical to synaptic function, contemporary physical theory must in principle be used when analyzing human brain dynamics. The new framework, unlike its classical-physics-based predecessor is erected directly upon, and is compatible with, the prevailing principles of physics, and is able to represent more adequately than classical 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.
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 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.