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

Journal of basic and applied research international

OF THE QUANTUM MECHANICAL ’’AUTOMATA METAPHOR’’ OF THE LIVING STATE

Balázs, András

Published Apr 26, 2015• 1 citation
OpenAlex

Abstract

The symbol-matter problem of biological systems, posed clearly by H. H. Pattee, is followed up to its origin in a quantum mechanical framework. The two complementer descriptional mode (i.e. dynamical versus symbolic or quantum mechanical versus ''classical'') are defined as connected in a Copenhagen–type quasiclassical (h → 0) dynamics (internal time-dependent discrete projection operator formalism). The concept of natural symbol as constraint is described in the form of a quasiclassical wavefunction with classical measurement records as variables while the basic projectors are defined as a quasiclassical dynamical "bra" Hilbert vector acting on a quantum dynamical "ket" vector. The origin problem is touched necessarily upon, as a split between measurement record (so its quasiclassical wavefunction, natural symbol) and the quantum mechanical dynamical wavefunction. The concept of symmetry-restoring internal time process is introduced, following from compelling internal retrocausality of a time evolution (advocated several times elsewhere). While adopting basically the Copenhagen view, using some ideas of Everett and other aspects of non–orthodox formulations of quantum measurement, it is shown that the necessary imbedding of internal (-τ) time evolution into the split off external (+t) one and internal time ’’quantizations’’ (leading to a discrete total semigroup) results in a converging chain of quantum internal measurement transitions, similar to those introduced by H. P. Stapp in his symbolic (human mind-) model, ultimately leading to a model of an elementary, very special self-reproducing quantum automata, where the state transition functions are internally determined (programmed) from the very origin of their emergence. It is shown that only off-diagonal statistical matrix elements are to be used in the internal projectionally evoluting time–series (metabolism), ’’self’’-reproduction (diagonality) being the fixed point of the recursion of the internal state transitions of the proposed quantum mechanical automata model (’’metaphor’’).

Related papers

On a quantum mechanical system theory of the origin of life: from the Stapp-model to the origin of natural symbols

András Balázs

The Heisenberg–James–Stapp (quantum mechanical) mind model is surveyed and criticized briefly. The criticism points out that the model, while being essentially consistent concerning (human) consciousness, fundamentally lacks the evolutional point of view both onto- and phylogenetically. Ethology and other than Jamesian psychology is quoted and a quantum mechanical theoretical scheme is suggested to essentially extend Stapp’s frame in an evolutionary context. It is proposed that its central supposition, spontaneous quantum measurement can be better utilized in an investigation of the origin of the “subjective” process, having come about concomitantly with the chemistry of the origin of life. We dwell on its applicability at this latter process, at its heart standing, it is supposed, the endophysical nonlinear “self-measurement” of (quantum mechanically describable) matter, and so our investigation is extended to this primeval phenomenon. It is suggested that the life phenomenon is an indirect C* → (W*) → C* quantum algebraic process transition, where the (W*) system would represent the living state. Summarized also are our previous results on an internalized, “reversed”, time process, introduced originally by Gunji, which is subordinated to the external “forwards” time evolution, driving towards symmetry by gradual space-mappings, where the original splitting-up must have come about in a spontaneous symmetry breaking nonlinear “self-measurement” of matter in an endophysical World.

International Journal of General Systems•Oct 21, 2015•2 citations

Mind, Matter and Quantum Mechanics (2nd edition)

G. Mahler

Quantum mechanics is usually defined in terms of some loosely connected axioms and rules. Such a foundation is far from the beauty of, e.g., the `principles' underlying classical mechanics. Motivated, in addition, by notorious interpretation problems, there have been numerous attempts to modify or `complete' quantum mechanics. A first attempt was based on so-called hidden variables; its proponents essentially tried to expel the non-classical nature of quantum mechanics. More recent proposals intend to complete quantum mechanics not within mechanics proper but on a `higher (synthetic) level'; by means of a combination with gravitation theory (R Penrose), with quantum information theory (C M Caves, C A Fuchs) or with psychology and brain science (H P Stapp). I think it is fair to say that in each case the combination is with a subject that, per se , suffers from a very limited understanding that is even more severe than that of quantum mechanics. This was acceptable, though, if it could convincingly be argued that scientific progress desperately needs to join forces. Quantum mechanics of a closed system was a beautiful and well understood theory with its respective state being presented as a point on a deterministic trajectory in Liouville space---not unlike the motion of a classical N -particle system in its 6N -dimensional phase-space. Unfortunately, we need an inside and an outside view, we need an external reference frame, we need an observer. This unavoidable partition is the origin of most of the troubles we have with quantum mechanics. A pragmatic solution is introduced in the form of so-called measurement postulates: one of the various incompatible properties of the system under consideration is supposed to be realized (i.e. to become a fact, to be defined without fundamental dispersion) based on `instantaneous' projections within some externally selected measurement basis. As a result, the theory becomes essentially statistical rather than deterministic; furthermore there is an asymmetry between the observed and the observing. This is the point where consciousness may come in. Complemented by an introduction and several appendices, Henry Stapp's book consists essentially of three parts: theory, implications, and new developments. The theory part gives a very readable account of the Copenhagen interpretation, some aspects of a psychophysical theory, and, eventually, hints towards a quantum foundation of the brain--mind connection. The next part, `implications', summarizes some previous attempts to bridge the gap between the working rules of quantum mechanics and their possible consequences for our understanding of this world (Pauli, Everett, Bohm, Heisenberg). The last section, `new developments', dwells on some ideas about the conscious brain and its possible foundation on quantum mechanics. The book is an interesting and, in part, fascinating contribution to a field that continues to be a companion to `practical' quantum mechanics since its very beginning. It is doubtful whether such types of `quantum ontologies' will ever become (empirically) testable; right now one can hardly expect more than to be offered some consistent `grand picture', which the reader may find more or less acceptable or even rewarding. Many practicing quantum physicists, though, will remain unimpressed. The shift from synthetic ontology to analytic ontology is the foundation of the present work. This means that fundamental wholes are being partitioned into their ontologically subordinate components by means of `events'. The actual event, in turn, is an abrupt change in the Heisenberg state describing the quantum universe. The new state then defines the tendencies associated with the next actual event. To avoid infinite regression in terms of going from one state of tendencies to the next, consciousness is there to give these events a special `feel', to provide a status of `intrinsic actuality'. The brain of an alert human observer is similar in an important way to a quantum detection device: it can amplify small signals to large macroscopic effects. On the other hand, actual events are not postulated to occur exclusively in brains. They are more generally associated with the formation of records. Records are necessarily part of the total state of the universe: it is obvious that the state of the universe cannot undergo a Schrödinger dynamics and at the same time record its own history. `The full universe consists therefore of an exceedingly thin veneer of relatively sluggish, directly observable properties resting on a vast ocean or rapidly fluctuating unobservable ones.' The present ideas also bear on how the world should be seen to develop. While conventional cosmology encounters problems as to how to define the intial conditions, which would enter the governing equations of motion, here `the boundary conditions are set not at some initial time, but gradually by a sequence of acts that imposes a sequence of constraints. After any sequence of acts there remains a collection of possible worlds, some of which will be eliminated by the next act.' Connected with those acts is `meaning': there has always been some speculation about the special significance of local properties in our understanding of the world. One could argue that correlations (even the quantum correlations found, e.g., in the EPR-experiments) were as real as anything else. But also Stapp stresses the special role of locality: the `local observable properties, or properties similar to them are the natural, and perhaps exclusive, carriers of meaning in the quantum universe. From this point of view the quantum universe tends to create meaning.' This sounds like an absolute concept: meaning not with respect to something else, but defined intrinsically---not easy to digest. The role of consciousness in the developing quantum universe requires more attention. `The causal irrelevance of our thoughts within classical physics constitutes a serious deficiency of that theory, construed as a description of reality.' This is taken to be entirely different within quantum mechanics. `The core idea of quantum mechanics is to describe our activities as knowledge-seeking and knowledge-using agents.' `21st century science does not reduce human beings to mechanical automata. Rather it elevates human beings to agents whose free choices can, according to the known laws, actually influence their behaviour.' An example with respect to perception is discussed: `Why, when we look at a triangle, do we experience three lines joined at three points and not some pattern of neuron firings?' The brain `does not convert an actual whole triangle into some jumbled set of particle motions; rather it converts a concatenation of separate external events into the actualization of some single integrated pattern of neural activity that is congruent to the perceived whole triangle.' How convincing is this proposal? It is hard to tell. I think Henry Stapp did a good job, but there are tight limitations to any such endeavour. Quantum mechanics is often strange indeed, but it also gives rise to our classical world around us. For the emergence of classicality jumps and measurement projections (the basic phenomena connected with those fundamental events of choice) are not needed. Therefore, I doubt whether the explanation of the evolution of our world really allows (or requires) that much free choice. On the other hand, most scientist will agree that empirical science was not possible without free will: we could not ask independent questions if this asking was part of a deterministic trajectory. The fact that the result of a quantum measurement is indeterminate (within given probabilities) does certainly not explain free will. How about the type of measurment? The experimentalist will have to assume that he can select the pertinent observable within some limits. But given a certain design the so-called pointer basis (producing stable measurement results) is no longer a matter of free choice. `The main theme of classical physics is that we live in a clocklike universe.' Today it is often assumed that the universe was a big (quantum-) computer or a cellular automaton. Many would be all too happy to leave that rather restrictive picture behind. But where to go? Stapp suggests giving consciousness a prominent role: `The most profound alteration of the fundamental principles was to bring consciousness of human beings into the basic structure of the physical theory.' How far we are able to go in this direction will depend on the amount of concrete research results becoming available to support this view.

Journal of Physics A Mathematical and General•Jun 17, 2004•4 citations

Internal Quantum Measurements and the Growth of Information

Abir U. Igamberdiev

Introduction In the processes of adaptation, development and evolution, living systems interpret themselves in the environment resulting in changes of both. This leads to the growth of information via rescaling of internal time (heterochrony) followed by spatial reconstructions of morphology (heterotopy). The growth of information is based on perpetual changes in its interpretation in the changing world. Biological evolution involves the anticipatory epigenetic changes in interpretation of the genetic information which cannot be generally forecasted but can provide canalization of structural changes defined by the existing organization leading to predictable patterns of form generation. Social evolution is accompanied by unprecedented growth of the informational field that leads to progressive development of human society. In modern theoretical biology, the internal measurement concept was suggested as a background for explanation of the phenomenon of life (Matsuno, 1995). The quantum measurement represents the action of a measuring device on the measured system. The quantum measurement is an irreversible phenomenon exhibiting itself as a reduction of the potential field. It has also a relation to the irreversibility of time (Igamberdiev, 1993). The collapse of wave function is not equivalent to time until it does not generate a measurable duration, but when its pattern is repeated consistently, the clock can be set, and the system becomes organized in time. When the measuring device is a part of measured system, the measurement proceeds internally in relation to the whole system and the latter becomes more complex as a result of measurement itself. The aim of this study is to discuss the role of internal measurement in the growth of information in evolving systems. This can refer to biological evolution, social evolution, and as well to the cosmic evolution, which is represented in the phenomenon of expansion of the Universe. Internal Measurement and the Generation of New Information The internal measurement leads to an iterative recursive process which appears as the development and evolution of the combined system containing the measuring device and the measured object. The quantum measuring device can be organized in such way that it “encodes” the system in the course of interaction with the measured object, and makes it possible for the measurement to proceed in a regular way. In this case, such system can memorize the evolutionary complication of organization in a digital information-bearing subsystem and evolve further; in other words it contains an internal description memorizing the result of measurement. The logical precondition of the growth of information in this evolving process is the incompleteness of biosystem’s internal description, while the physical precondition is the uncertainty of quantum measurement. The evolutionary increase of complexity becomes possible when genotype appears as a system distinct from phenotype and is embedded into it, which separates energy-degenerate rate-independent genetic symbols from the rate-dependent dynamics of construction that they control (Pattee, 2001). Evolutionary growth of information becomes its own cause, a universal property of our world. The growth of information accompanies the appearance of measurable time that occurs in the systems performing quantum measurements in a regular way, with low dissipation of energy (Igamberdiev, 1993, 2004). These systems are modelled as hypercycles and can be defined as structures in which the subset of a substrate set of the catalytic system happens to be the matrix for generating and reproducing the set of catalysts itself (Igamberdiev, 1999). This definition keeps the main features of the original notion of hypercycle given by Eigen and Schuster (1979). The hypercyclic system is closed in the way that all of the catalysts needed for an organism to stay alive (representing an efficient causation according to Aristotle and forming organism’s spatiotemporal structure) must be produced by the organism itself, only relying on matter and energy from the outside (Letelier et al., 2011). When hypercycles appear in evolution, time becomes an independent measurable variable due to the internal reproducible changes. Hypercycle organizes irreversibility of quantum measurement into a measurable duration. Eigen’s hypercycle is a formalized representation of the autopoietic system of Maturana and Varela or Rosen’s (M,R) system (Leteiler et al., 2011). The system becomes an internal autonomous clock that distinguishes the past (memory), the present (life), and the future (anticipation based on the reproducible model), so the modeling, logic and digital information growth become possible within the system (Rosen, 1985). The hypercycle having own embedded description, becomes a structure that realizes computation in accordance with its internal logic defined by the embedded description. The latter has the property of incompleteness which is reflected in the fact that quantum correlations of the states of the system are associated with undecidable logic theories, i.e., they can potentially generate the statements not defined within the system. The undecidability can be interpreted in the sense similar to the Gödel’s incompleteness theorem, meaning that there exist propositions, expressible in the formal logic, which cannot be proven or disproven (Briegel et al., 2009). These propositions become the grounds of expansion of the system and its informational growth. From the quantum mechanical point of view, the emergence of a new statement results in acquiring a new error-correction meaning to support the internal quantum state (IQS) (Igamberdiev, 2004, 2007). The IQS keeps the system organizationally invariant. It is supported by the set of error-correcting commands that aim to keep IQS free from external demolitions. The error-correction information becomes an important part of the whole informational field. A new statement makes the system more complex (it leads to an increase of its informational content), with its all spatiotemporal organizational invariance be rescaled. In the course of evolution, an available element of a formal system (similarly to a word when used as a metaphor) can acquire another (in addition to already existing) value that contributes to formation of a new level of organization in the system. The logical basis of this action is the incompleteness of the existing formal system that allows assigning arbitrary values to the statements non-provable within that system, while the physical basis is the quantum uncertainty arising in quantum measurement. A new statement can arise from existing elements by acquiring the double function, however, for fixation of this new statement via expansion of existing formal system, some informational redundancy of the system is needed, which can be achieved by multiplication of some of its elements. Genome is a system which possesses an internal complementarity between the linear texts and their superposition. Relevantly to this, complementarity means that text and hypertext cannot be viewed at the same moment: they should be separated by a time interval. It is an example of uncertainty between the system and its embedding. Overlapping genes, alternatively splicing sequences, RNA and DNA editing, introns, and recombination according to molecular addresses are the features of this hypertext generating a potentially infinite number of language games. Genome as a complete language exists as a complementary set of its alternative combinations resulting in logical paradoxes which determine its temporal dynamics (Isalan, 2009). This superposition is a basis for ontogenesis, adaptation and evolution. Thus, the total “true” genome is a superposition of contradictory arrangements, which generate one single arrangement at a concrete moment of time. The pool of mobile genetic elements expands the combinatorial capacity of the genome by many times. An ambiguity in meaning is analogous to the quantum uncertainty principle in which it is impossible to define strictly the position and impulse of a particle simultaneously, or to fix certain energy in a very short period of time necessary for its registration. The question of a minimal size of the autocatalytic self-reproducing system and its composition has been discussed in several works (Sharov, 2009; Steel et al., 2013). Self-reproduction itself is a creative process of placing text in text with following self-growing of this joint structure. Any evolutionary change also begins from the placing of “text into text”. This is possible because genome is structurally adapted for realization of such a non-trivial function. Moreover, even a point mutation or deletion may be considered as generative if it is placed in the repeated (e.g., diploid) structure. The doubling is a premise of metasystem transition, which includes duplication of the original system and the establishment of control over multiple copies (Turchin, 1977). The evolutionary significance of gene duplication was considered by Ohno (1970) as a premise of neofunctionalization. The advantage of sexual reproduction is in the casual combinatorial generating of new statements from two separate texts that can acquire meanings, thus it resists evolutionary degradation. It becomes a prerequisite for growing of information and complexity (Igamberdiev, 2014). The combinatorial interaction of heterochronic texts generates a new system in which the internal time is rescaled in a new way that generally cannot be forecasted. The heterochronic duplication (via hybridization of temporally different organisms) generates more possibilities for the metasystem transition. Thus, the incompleteness of embedded set of symbols is the formal cause of evolution. The physical representation of this incompleteness is a quantum uncertainty in the course of measurement (Matsuno, 1992). It spans from the level of elementary particles to biological evolution and to the phenomenon of free will and consciousness. Growth of Information in the Expanding Universe The growth of information that we discuss here mainly in relation to biological evolution is relevant also to the physical space-time scales. The self-growing principle of quantum measurement has a property of intrinsic expansion of the informational field. The relationship between observable nature and a hidden “potential” nature is modeled, according to Kineman (2010), as an imaginary space-time domain geometrically represented as radial “Minkowski-space”. Despite of the fact that local space and time are normally represented as real numbers, the general relationship in this geometry is hyperbolic in accordance with the special theory of relativity. When mapped as a radial geometry, the space-time is seen to be intrinsically dynamic (expanding) and self-similar across all scales. The geometry has the properties of early and present acceleration. This representation eliminates the “light cone” and thus all regions in this model are the domains of existence and are observable over time. Nevertheless a domain of general, non-local reality is represented in the imaginary axes that exist simultaneously with measurable, local domains. The Universe in the concept of Kineman (2010) consists of the units called “holons”, which vaguely correspond to Leibniz’s monads. They possess simultaneous properties of location and non-location, as a point of non-differentiated whole appearing in a subject-object relation. The Everett’s interpretation of quantum mechanics works in these isolated domains but not between the domains, the same idea has been suggested by Matsuno (2012) for the individual biological systems taken as separate domains. The reality of superposition of the wave function is limited by the single monad and does not expand outside it, and in this sense monads do not have windows as originally proposed by Leibniz. Conclusion The growth of information is the basic property of evolving systems and it follows from the interaction between non-local and local domains in the course of internal quantum measurements. The internal measurement leads to an iterative recursive process which appears as evolution of the combined system containing the measuring device and the measured object. The system through measurement acquires the property of expansion, which is seen in biological evolution, social development, and at cosmic scales as expansion of the Universe. References Briegel, H.J.; Browne, D.E.; Dur, W.; Raussendorf, R.; Van den Nest, M. Measurement-based quantum computation. Nature Physics 2009, 5, 19-26. Eigen, M.; Schuster, P. The Hypercycle: A Principle of Natural Self-Organization. Springer, Berlin, 1979. Igamberdiev, A.U. Quantum mechanical properties of biosystems: A framework for complexity, structural stability and transformations. Biosystems 1993, 31, 65‐ Igamberdiev, A.U. Foundations of metabolic organization: coherence as a basis of computational properties in metabolic networks. Biosystems 1999, 50, 1-16. Igamberdiev, A.U. Quantum computation, non-demolition measurements, and reflective control in living systems. Biosystems 2004, 77, 47–56. Igamberdiev, A.U. Physical limits of computation and emergence of life. Biosystems 2007, 90, 340–349. Igamberdiev, A.U. Time rescaling and pattern formation in biological evolution. Biosystems 2014, 123, 19-26. Isalan, M. Gene networks and liar paradoxes. Bioessays 2009, 31, 1110-1115. Letelier, J.C.; Cárdenas, M.L.; Cornish-Bowden, A. From L'Homme Machine to metabolic closure: steps towards understanding life. Journal of Theoretical Biology 2011, 286, 100-113. Matsuno, K. The uncertainty principle as an evolutionary engine. Biosystems 1991, 27, 63-76. Matsuno, K. Quantum and biological computation. Biosystems 1995, 35, 209-212. Matsuno, K. Chemical evolution as a concrete scheme for naturalizing the relative-state of quantum mechanics. Biosystems 2012, 109, 159-168. Kineman, J.J. Relational self-similar space-time cosmology revisited. Proceedings of the 54th Meeting of the International Society for System Sciences. Waterloo, Canada, 2010. Ohno, S. Evolution by Gene Duplication. Springer, New York, 1970. Pattee, H.H. The physics of symbols: bridging the epistemic cut. Biosystems 2001, 60, 5-21. Sharov, A.A., 2009. Coenzyme autocatalytic network on the surface of oil microspheres as a model for the origin of life. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2009, 10, 1838-1852. Steel, M.; Hordijk, W.; Smith, J. Minimal autocatalytic networks. Journal of Theoretical Biology 2013, 332, 96-107. Turchin, V. Phenomenon of Science. Columbia University Press, New York, 1977.

ISIS Summit: The Information Society at the Crossroads•Jun 23, 2015•0 citations

The Ontological Roots of Human Science: the Message of Evolution—The Physics of Freedom (Choice)

András Balázs

The original proposal of H. H. CitationPattee (1971) of basing quantum theoretical measurement theory on the theory of the origin of life, and its far reaching consequences, is discussed in the light of a recently emerging biological paradigm of internal measurement. It is established that the “measurement problem” of quantum physics can, in principle, be traced back to the internal material constraints of the biological organisms, where choice is a fundamental attribute of the self-measurement of matter. In this light, which is shown to be a consequence of Pattee's original suggestion, it is proposed that biological evolution is a gradual liberation from the inert unity of “subject” and “object” of inanimate matter (as “natural law” and “initial conditions”), to a split biological existence of them and, as a consequence, the “message of evolution” is freedom, rather than complexity in itself. Some classical philosophical systems are brought into context to show that the epistemologies of several strictly philosophical systems of the social sciences are well acquainted with the problem and their solutions support our conclusions.

World Futures•Nov 8, 2007•4 citations

A realistic model for completing Quantum Mechanics

M. Baldo

In the well known Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum mechanics, advocated by N. Bohr, the physical objects and the experimental results can be described only in a macroscopic language, leaving any possible microscopic description as unspeakable. This point of view has been deepened by C. Rovelli in the relational interpretation of Quantum mechanics. Most of the alternative interpretations, which try a detailed microscopic description of physical phenomena and of their evolution, have in common the explicit introduction of the wave function as the basic element of the theory. These interpretations require the notion of quantum state as the fundamental concept of the theory, which is the typical unspeakable physical element according to the Copenhagen interpretation. The two basic physical entities are intimately bound together by the integrity of the wave function. These interpretations are usually indicated as realistic. It is well known that the use of the wave function and its time evolution in the description of the physical processes leads unavoidably to some difficulties or so-called paradoxes. The measurement problem is at the center of these difficulties, mainly because it requires the introduction of the reduction process of the wave function, which is not included explicitly within the mathematical formalism of Quantum Mechanics. In this paper we build up and propose a model which goes beyond the standard formalism and which is able to solve the measurement problem and all the other difficulties which, in a way or in another, are related to it.

arXiv:2104.12701•Apr 26, 2021•1 citation

QUANTUM FIELD THEORY FROM FIRST PRINCIPLES

Paolo Perinotti

The mathematical description of quantum systems univocally identies their nature. In other words we treat a system as quantum if we describe its behaviour adopting Hilbert spaces and structures thereof, as prescribed by the postulates of quantum theory. The choice of using quantum systems as the elementary systems of physics can be justied in terms of informational principles, thanks to results of the last decade. Such results come as the conclusion of a research program that lasted almost one century, with the aim of reformulating quantum theory in terms of operational principles. This achievement now poses a new challenge, that we face here. If the systems of quantum theory are thought of as elementary information carriers in the rst place, rather than elementary constituents of matter, and their connections are logical connections within a given algorithm, rather than space-time relations, then we need to nd the origin of mechanical concepts—that characterise quantum mechanics as a theory of physical systems. To this end,we will illustrate howphysical laws can be viewed as algorithms for the update of memory registers that make a physical system. Imposing the characteristic properties of physical laws to such an algorithm, i.e. homogeneity, reversibility and isotropy, we will show that the physical laws thus selected are particular algorithms known as cellular automata. Further assumptions regarding maximal simplicity of the algorithm lead to two cellular automata only, that in a suitable regime can be described by Weyl’s dierential equations, lying at the basis of the dynamics of relativistic quantum elds. We will nally discuss how the same cellular automaton can give rise to both Fermionic eld dynamics and to Maxwell’s equations, that rule the dynamics of the electromagnetic eld. We will conclude reviewing the discussion of the relativity principle, that must be suitably adapted to the scenario where space-time is not an elementary notion, through the denition of a change of inertial reference frame, and whose formulation leads to the recovery of the symmetry of Minkowski space-time, identied with Poincar´e’s group. Space-time thus emerges as one of the manifestations of physical laws, rather than the background where they occur, and its features are determined by the dynamics of systems, necessarily equipped with dierential equations that express it. In brief, there is no space-time unless an evolution rule requires it.

arXiv:2011.09881•Istituto Lombardo - Accademia di Scienze e Lettere - Rendiconti di Scienze•May 11, 2020•2 citations
The symbol-matter problem of biological systems, posed clearly by H. H. Pattee, is followed up to its origin in a quantum mechanical framework. The two complementer descriptional mode (i.e. dynamical versus symbolic or quantum mechanical versus ''classical'') are defined as connected in a Copenhagen–type quasiclassical (h → 0) dynamics (internal time-dependent discrete projection operator formalism). The concept of natural symbol as constraint is described in the form of a quasiclassical wavefunction with classical measurement records as variables while the basic projectors are defined as a quasiclassical dynamical "bra" Hilbert vector acting on a quantum dynamical "ket" vector. The origin problem is touched necessarily upon, as a split between measurement record (so its quasiclassical wavefunction, natural symbol) and the quantum mechanical dynamical wavefunction. The concept of symmetry-restoring internal time process is introduced, following from compelling internal retrocausality of a time evolution (advocated several times elsewhere). While adopting basically the Copenhagen view, using some ideas of Everett and other aspects of non–orthodox formulations of quantum measurement, it is shown that the necessary imbedding of internal (-τ) time evolution into the split off external (+t) one and internal time ’’quantizations’’ (leading to a discrete total semigroup) results in a converging chain of quantum internal measurement transitions, similar to those introduced by H. P. Stapp in his symbolic (human mind-) model, ultimately leading to a model of an elementary, very special self-reproducing quantum automata, where the state transition functions are internally determined (programmed) from the very origin of their emergence. It is shown that only off-diagonal statistical matrix elements are to be used in the internal projectionally evoluting time–series (metabolism), ’’self’’-reproduction (diagonality) being the fixed point of the recursion of the internal state transitions of the proposed quantum mechanical automata model (’’metaphor’’).
The Heisenberg–James–Stapp (quantum mechanical) mind model is surveyed and criticized briefly. The criticism points out that the model, while being essentially consistent concerning (human) consciousness, fundamentally lacks the evolutional point of view both onto- and phylogenetically. Ethology and other than Jamesian psychology is quoted and a quantum mechanical theoretical scheme is suggested to essentially extend Stapp’s frame in an evolutionary context. It is proposed that its central supposition, spontaneous quantum measurement can be better utilized in an investigation of the origin of the “subjective” process, having come about concomitantly with the chemistry of the origin of life. We dwell on its applicability at this latter process, at its heart standing, it is supposed, the endophysical nonlinear “self-measurement” of (quantum mechanically describable) matter, and so our investigation is extended to this primeval phenomenon. It is suggested that the life phenomenon is an indirect C* → (W*) → C* quantum algebraic process transition, where the (W*) system would represent the living state. Summarized also are our previous results on an internalized, “reversed”, time process, introduced originally by Gunji, which is subordinated to the external “forwards” time evolution, driving towards symmetry by gradual space-mappings, where the original splitting-up must have come about in a spontaneous symmetry breaking nonlinear “self-measurement” of matter in an endophysical World.
Quantum mechanics is usually defined in terms of some loosely connected axioms and rules. Such a foundation is far from the beauty of, e.g., the `principles' underlying classical mechanics. Motivated, in addition, by notorious interpretation problems, there have been numerous attempts to modify or `complete' quantum mechanics. A first attempt was based on so-called hidden variables; its proponents essentially tried to expel the non-classical nature of quantum mechanics. More recent proposals intend to complete quantum mechanics not within mechanics proper but on a `higher (synthetic) level'; by means of a combination with gravitation theory (R Penrose), with quantum information theory (C M Caves, C A Fuchs) or with psychology and brain science (H P Stapp). I think it is fair to say that in each case the combination is with a subject that, per se , suffers from a very limited understanding that is even more severe than that of quantum mechanics. This was acceptable, though, if it could convincingly be argued that scientific progress desperately needs to join forces. Quantum mechanics of a closed system was a beautiful and well understood theory with its respective state being presented as a point on a deterministic trajectory in Liouville space---not unlike the motion of a classical N -particle system in its 6N -dimensional phase-space. Unfortunately, we need an inside and an outside view, we need an external reference frame, we need an observer. This unavoidable partition is the origin of most of the troubles we have with quantum mechanics. A pragmatic solution is introduced in the form of so-called measurement postulates: one of the various incompatible properties of the system under consideration is supposed to be realized (i.e. to become a fact, to be defined without fundamental dispersion) based on `instantaneous' projections within some externally selected measurement basis. As a result, the theory becomes essentially statistical rather than deterministic; furthermore there is an asymmetry between the observed and the observing. This is the point where consciousness may come in. Complemented by an introduction and several appendices, Henry Stapp's book consists essentially of three parts: theory, implications, and new developments. The theory part gives a very readable account of the Copenhagen interpretation, some aspects of a psychophysical theory, and, eventually, hints towards a quantum foundation of the brain--mind connection. The next part, `implications', summarizes some previous attempts to bridge the gap between the working rules of quantum mechanics and their possible consequences for our understanding of this world (Pauli, Everett, Bohm, Heisenberg). The last section, `new developments', dwells on some ideas about the conscious brain and its possible foundation on quantum mechanics. The book is an interesting and, in part, fascinating contribution to a field that continues to be a companion to `practical' quantum mechanics since its very beginning. It is doubtful whether such types of `quantum ontologies' will ever become (empirically) testable; right now one can hardly expect more than to be offered some consistent `grand picture', which the reader may find more or less acceptable or even rewarding. Many practicing quantum physicists, though, will remain unimpressed. The shift from synthetic ontology to analytic ontology is the foundation of the present work. This means that fundamental wholes are being partitioned into their ontologically subordinate components by means of `events'. The actual event, in turn, is an abrupt change in the Heisenberg state describing the quantum universe. The new state then defines the tendencies associated with the next actual event. To avoid infinite regression in terms of going from one state of tendencies to the next, consciousness is there to give these events a special `feel', to provide a status of `intrinsic actuality'. The brain of an alert human observer is similar in an important way to a quantum detection device: it can amplify small signals to large macroscopic effects. On the other hand, actual events are not postulated to occur exclusively in brains. They are more generally associated with the formation of records. Records are necessarily part of the total state of the universe: it is obvious that the state of the universe cannot undergo a Schrödinger dynamics and at the same time record its own history. `The full universe consists therefore of an exceedingly thin veneer of relatively sluggish, directly observable properties resting on a vast ocean or rapidly fluctuating unobservable ones.' The present ideas also bear on how the world should be seen to develop. While conventional cosmology encounters problems as to how to define the intial conditions, which would enter the governing equations of motion, here `the boundary conditions are set not at some initial time, but gradually by a sequence of acts that imposes a sequence of constraints. After any sequence of acts there remains a collection of possible worlds, some of which will be eliminated by the next act.' Connected with those acts is `meaning': there has always been some speculation about the special significance of local properties in our understanding of the world. One could argue that correlations (even the quantum correlations found, e.g., in the EPR-experiments) were as real as anything else. But also Stapp stresses the special role of locality: the `local observable properties, or properties similar to them are the natural, and perhaps exclusive, carriers of meaning in the quantum universe. From this point of view the quantum universe tends to create meaning.' This sounds like an absolute concept: meaning not with respect to something else, but defined intrinsically---not easy to digest. The role of consciousness in the developing quantum universe requires more attention. `The causal irrelevance of our thoughts within classical physics constitutes a serious deficiency of that theory, construed as a description of reality.' This is taken to be entirely different within quantum mechanics. `The core idea of quantum mechanics is to describe our activities as knowledge-seeking and knowledge-using agents.' `21st century science does not reduce human beings to mechanical automata. Rather it elevates human beings to agents whose free choices can, according to the known laws, actually influence their behaviour.' An example with respect to perception is discussed: `Why, when we look at a triangle, do we experience three lines joined at three points and not some pattern of neuron firings?' The brain `does not convert an actual whole triangle into some jumbled set of particle motions; rather it converts a concatenation of separate external events into the actualization of some single integrated pattern of neural activity that is congruent to the perceived whole triangle.' How convincing is this proposal? It is hard to tell. I think Henry Stapp did a good job, but there are tight limitations to any such endeavour. Quantum mechanics is often strange indeed, but it also gives rise to our classical world around us. For the emergence of classicality jumps and measurement projections (the basic phenomena connected with those fundamental events of choice) are not needed. Therefore, I doubt whether the explanation of the evolution of our world really allows (or requires) that much free choice. On the other hand, most scientist will agree that empirical science was not possible without free will: we could not ask independent questions if this asking was part of a deterministic trajectory. The fact that the result of a quantum measurement is indeterminate (within given probabilities) does certainly not explain free will. How about the type of measurment? The experimentalist will have to assume that he can select the pertinent observable within some limits. But given a certain design the so-called pointer basis (producing stable measurement results) is no longer a matter of free choice. `The main theme of classical physics is that we live in a clocklike universe.' Today it is often assumed that the universe was a big (quantum-) computer or a cellular automaton. Many would be all too happy to leave that rather restrictive picture behind. But where to go? Stapp suggests giving consciousness a prominent role: `The most profound alteration of the fundamental principles was to bring consciousness of human beings into the basic structure of the physical theory.' How far we are able to go in this direction will depend on the amount of concrete research results becoming available to support this view.
Introduction In the processes of adaptation, development and evolution, living systems interpret themselves in the environment resulting in changes of both. This leads to the growth of information via rescaling of internal time (heterochrony) followed by spatial reconstructions of morphology (heterotopy). The growth of information is based on perpetual changes in its interpretation in the changing world. Biological evolution involves the anticipatory epigenetic changes in interpretation of the genetic information which cannot be generally forecasted but can provide canalization of structural changes defined by the existing organization leading to predictable patterns of form generation. Social evolution is accompanied by unprecedented growth of the informational field that leads to progressive development of human society. In modern theoretical biology, the internal measurement concept was suggested as a background for explanation of the phenomenon of life (Matsuno, 1995). The quantum measurement represents the action of a measuring device on the measured system. The quantum measurement is an irreversible phenomenon exhibiting itself as a reduction of the potential field. It has also a relation to the irreversibility of time (Igamberdiev, 1993). The collapse of wave function is not equivalent to time until it does not generate a measurable duration, but when its pattern is repeated consistently, the clock can be set, and the system becomes organized in time. When the measuring device is a part of measured system, the measurement proceeds internally in relation to the whole system and the latter becomes more complex as a result of measurement itself. The aim of this study is to discuss the role of internal measurement in the growth of information in evolving systems. This can refer to biological evolution, social evolution, and as well to the cosmic evolution, which is represented in the phenomenon of expansion of the Universe. Internal Measurement and the Generation of New Information The internal measurement leads to an iterative recursive process which appears as the development and evolution of the combined system containing the measuring device and the measured object. The quantum measuring device can be organized in such way that it “encodes” the system in the course of interaction with the measured object, and makes it possible for the measurement to proceed in a regular way. In this case, such system can memorize the evolutionary complication of organization in a digital information-bearing subsystem and evolve further; in other words it contains an internal description memorizing the result of measurement. The logical precondition of the growth of information in this evolving process is the incompleteness of biosystem’s internal description, while the physical precondition is the uncertainty of quantum measurement. The evolutionary increase of complexity becomes possible when genotype appears as a system distinct from phenotype and is embedded into it, which separates energy-degenerate rate-independent genetic symbols from the rate-dependent dynamics of construction that they control (Pattee, 2001). Evolutionary growth of information becomes its own cause, a universal property of our world. The growth of information accompanies the appearance of measurable time that occurs in the systems performing quantum measurements in a regular way, with low dissipation of energy (Igamberdiev, 1993, 2004). These systems are modelled as hypercycles and can be defined as structures in which the subset of a substrate set of the catalytic system happens to be the matrix for generating and reproducing the set of catalysts itself (Igamberdiev, 1999). This definition keeps the main features of the original notion of hypercycle given by Eigen and Schuster (1979). The hypercyclic system is closed in the way that all of the catalysts needed for an organism to stay alive (representing an efficient causation according to Aristotle and forming organism’s spatiotemporal structure) must be produced by the organism itself, only relying on matter and energy from the outside (Letelier et al., 2011). When hypercycles appear in evolution, time becomes an independent measurable variable due to the internal reproducible changes. Hypercycle organizes irreversibility of quantum measurement into a measurable duration. Eigen’s hypercycle is a formalized representation of the autopoietic system of Maturana and Varela or Rosen’s (M,R) system (Leteiler et al., 2011). The system becomes an internal autonomous clock that distinguishes the past (memory), the present (life), and the future (anticipation based on the reproducible model), so the modeling, logic and digital information growth become possible within the system (Rosen, 1985). The hypercycle having own embedded description, becomes a structure that realizes computation in accordance with its internal logic defined by the embedded description. The latter has the property of incompleteness which is reflected in the fact that quantum correlations of the states of the system are associated with undecidable logic theories, i.e., they can potentially generate the statements not defined within the system. The undecidability can be interpreted in the sense similar to the Gödel’s incompleteness theorem, meaning that there exist propositions, expressible in the formal logic, which cannot be proven or disproven (Briegel et al., 2009). These propositions become the grounds of expansion of the system and its informational growth. From the quantum mechanical point of view, the emergence of a new statement results in acquiring a new error-correction meaning to support the internal quantum state (IQS) (Igamberdiev, 2004, 2007). The IQS keeps the system organizationally invariant. It is supported by the set of error-correcting commands that aim to keep IQS free from external demolitions. The error-correction information becomes an important part of the whole informational field. A new statement makes the system more complex (it leads to an increase of its informational content), with its all spatiotemporal organizational invariance be rescaled. In the course of evolution, an available element of a formal system (similarly to a word when used as a metaphor) can acquire another (in addition to already existing) value that contributes to formation of a new level of organization in the system. The logical basis of this action is the incompleteness of the existing formal system that allows assigning arbitrary values to the statements non-provable within that system, while the physical basis is the quantum uncertainty arising in quantum measurement. A new statement can arise from existing elements by acquiring the double function, however, for fixation of this new statement via expansion of existing formal system, some informational redundancy of the system is needed, which can be achieved by multiplication of some of its elements. Genome is a system which possesses an internal complementarity between the linear texts and their superposition. Relevantly to this, complementarity means that text and hypertext cannot be viewed at the same moment: they should be separated by a time interval. It is an example of uncertainty between the system and its embedding. Overlapping genes, alternatively splicing sequences, RNA and DNA editing, introns, and recombination according to molecular addresses are the features of this hypertext generating a potentially infinite number of language games. Genome as a complete language exists as a complementary set of its alternative combinations resulting in logical paradoxes which determine its temporal dynamics (Isalan, 2009). This superposition is a basis for ontogenesis, adaptation and evolution. Thus, the total “true” genome is a superposition of contradictory arrangements, which generate one single arrangement at a concrete moment of time. The pool of mobile genetic elements expands the combinatorial capacity of the genome by many times. An ambiguity in meaning is analogous to the quantum uncertainty principle in which it is impossible to define strictly the position and impulse of a particle simultaneously, or to fix certain energy in a very short period of time necessary for its registration. The question of a minimal size of the autocatalytic self-reproducing system and its composition has been discussed in several works (Sharov, 2009; Steel et al., 2013). Self-reproduction itself is a creative process of placing text in text with following self-growing of this joint structure. Any evolutionary change also begins from the placing of “text into text”. This is possible because genome is structurally adapted for realization of such a non-trivial function. Moreover, even a point mutation or deletion may be considered as generative if it is placed in the repeated (e.g., diploid) structure. The doubling is a premise of metasystem transition, which includes duplication of the original system and the establishment of control over multiple copies (Turchin, 1977). The evolutionary significance of gene duplication was considered by Ohno (1970) as a premise of neofunctionalization. The advantage of sexual reproduction is in the casual combinatorial generating of new statements from two separate texts that can acquire meanings, thus it resists evolutionary degradation. It becomes a prerequisite for growing of information and complexity (Igamberdiev, 2014). The combinatorial interaction of heterochronic texts generates a new system in which the internal time is rescaled in a new way that generally cannot be forecasted. The heterochronic duplication (via hybridization of temporally different organisms) generates more possibilities for the metasystem transition. Thus, the incompleteness of embedded set of symbols is the formal cause of evolution. The physical representation of this incompleteness is a quantum uncertainty in the course of measurement (Matsuno, 1992). It spans from the level of elementary particles to biological evolution and to the phenomenon of free will and consciousness. Growth of Information in the Expanding Universe The growth of information that we discuss here mainly in relation to biological evolution is relevant also to the physical space-time scales. The self-growing principle of quantum measurement has a property of intrinsic expansion of the informational field. The relationship between observable nature and a hidden “potential” nature is modeled, according to Kineman (2010), as an imaginary space-time domain geometrically represented as radial “Minkowski-space”. Despite of the fact that local space and time are normally represented as real numbers, the general relationship in this geometry is hyperbolic in accordance with the special theory of relativity. When mapped as a radial geometry, the space-time is seen to be intrinsically dynamic (expanding) and self-similar across all scales. The geometry has the properties of early and present acceleration. This representation eliminates the “light cone” and thus all regions in this model are the domains of existence and are observable over time. Nevertheless a domain of general, non-local reality is represented in the imaginary axes that exist simultaneously with measurable, local domains. The Universe in the concept of Kineman (2010) consists of the units called “holons”, which vaguely correspond to Leibniz’s monads. They possess simultaneous properties of location and non-location, as a point of non-differentiated whole appearing in a subject-object relation. The Everett’s interpretation of quantum mechanics works in these isolated domains but not between the domains, the same idea has been suggested by Matsuno (2012) for the individual biological systems taken as separate domains. The reality of superposition of the wave function is limited by the single monad and does not expand outside it, and in this sense monads do not have windows as originally proposed by Leibniz. Conclusion The growth of information is the basic property of evolving systems and it follows from the interaction between non-local and local domains in the course of internal quantum measurements. The internal measurement leads to an iterative recursive process which appears as evolution of the combined system containing the measuring device and the measured object. The system through measurement acquires the property of expansion, which is seen in biological evolution, social development, and at cosmic scales as expansion of the Universe. References Briegel, H.J.; Browne, D.E.; Dur, W.; Raussendorf, R.; Van den Nest, M. Measurement-based quantum computation. Nature Physics 2009, 5, 19-26. Eigen, M.; Schuster, P. The Hypercycle: A Principle of Natural Self-Organization. Springer, Berlin, 1979. Igamberdiev, A.U. Quantum mechanical properties of biosystems: A framework for complexity, structural stability and transformations. Biosystems 1993, 31, 65‐ Igamberdiev, A.U. Foundations of metabolic organization: coherence as a basis of computational properties in metabolic networks. Biosystems 1999, 50, 1-16. Igamberdiev, A.U. Quantum computation, non-demolition measurements, and reflective control in living systems. Biosystems 2004, 77, 47–56. Igamberdiev, A.U. Physical limits of computation and emergence of life. Biosystems 2007, 90, 340–349. Igamberdiev, A.U. Time rescaling and pattern formation in biological evolution. Biosystems 2014, 123, 19-26. Isalan, M. Gene networks and liar paradoxes. Bioessays 2009, 31, 1110-1115. Letelier, J.C.; Cárdenas, M.L.; Cornish-Bowden, A. From L'Homme Machine to metabolic closure: steps towards understanding life. Journal of Theoretical Biology 2011, 286, 100-113. Matsuno, K. The uncertainty principle as an evolutionary engine. Biosystems 1991, 27, 63-76. Matsuno, K. Quantum and biological computation. Biosystems 1995, 35, 209-212. Matsuno, K. Chemical evolution as a concrete scheme for naturalizing the relative-state of quantum mechanics. Biosystems 2012, 109, 159-168. Kineman, J.J. Relational self-similar space-time cosmology revisited. Proceedings of the 54th Meeting of the International Society for System Sciences. Waterloo, Canada, 2010. Ohno, S. Evolution by Gene Duplication. Springer, New York, 1970. Pattee, H.H. The physics of symbols: bridging the epistemic cut. Biosystems 2001, 60, 5-21. Sharov, A.A., 2009. Coenzyme autocatalytic network on the surface of oil microspheres as a model for the origin of life. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2009, 10, 1838-1852. Steel, M.; Hordijk, W.; Smith, J. Minimal autocatalytic networks. Journal of Theoretical Biology 2013, 332, 96-107. Turchin, V. Phenomenon of Science. Columbia University Press, New York, 1977.
The original proposal of H. H. CitationPattee (1971) of basing quantum theoretical measurement theory on the theory of the origin of life, and its far reaching consequences, is discussed in the light of a recently emerging biological paradigm of internal measurement. It is established that the “measurement problem” of quantum physics can, in principle, be traced back to the internal material constraints of the biological organisms, where choice is a fundamental attribute of the self-measurement of matter. In this light, which is shown to be a consequence of Pattee's original suggestion, it is proposed that biological evolution is a gradual liberation from the inert unity of “subject” and “object” of inanimate matter (as “natural law” and “initial conditions”), to a split biological existence of them and, as a consequence, the “message of evolution” is freedom, rather than complexity in itself. Some classical philosophical systems are brought into context to show that the epistemologies of several strictly philosophical systems of the social sciences are well acquainted with the problem and their solutions support our conclusions.
In the well known Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum mechanics, advocated by N. Bohr, the physical objects and the experimental results can be described only in a macroscopic language, leaving any possible microscopic description as unspeakable. This point of view has been deepened by C. Rovelli in the relational interpretation of Quantum mechanics. Most of the alternative interpretations, which try a detailed microscopic description of physical phenomena and of their evolution, have in common the explicit introduction of the wave function as the basic element of the theory. These interpretations require the notion of quantum state as the fundamental concept of the theory, which is the typical unspeakable physical element according to the Copenhagen interpretation. The two basic physical entities are intimately bound together by the integrity of the wave function. These interpretations are usually indicated as realistic. It is well known that the use of the wave function and its time evolution in the description of the physical processes leads unavoidably to some difficulties or so-called paradoxes. The measurement problem is at the center of these difficulties, mainly because it requires the introduction of the reduction process of the wave function, which is not included explicitly within the mathematical formalism of Quantum Mechanics. In this paper we build up and propose a model which goes beyond the standard formalism and which is able to solve the measurement problem and all the other difficulties which, in a way or in another, are related to it.
The mathematical description of quantum systems univocally identies their nature. In other words we treat a system as quantum if we describe its behaviour adopting Hilbert spaces and structures thereof, as prescribed by the postulates of quantum theory. The choice of using quantum systems as the elementary systems of physics can be justied in terms of informational principles, thanks to results of the last decade. Such results come as the conclusion of a research program that lasted almost one century, with the aim of reformulating quantum theory in terms of operational principles. This achievement now poses a new challenge, that we face here. If the systems of quantum theory are thought of as elementary information carriers in the rst place, rather than elementary constituents of matter, and their connections are logical connections within a given algorithm, rather than space-time relations, then we need to nd the origin of mechanical concepts—that characterise quantum mechanics as a theory of physical systems. To this end,we will illustrate howphysical laws can be viewed as algorithms for the update of memory registers that make a physical system. Imposing the characteristic properties of physical laws to such an algorithm, i.e. homogeneity, reversibility and isotropy, we will show that the physical laws thus selected are particular algorithms known as cellular automata. Further assumptions regarding maximal simplicity of the algorithm lead to two cellular automata only, that in a suitable regime can be described by Weyl’s dierential equations, lying at the basis of the dynamics of relativistic quantum elds. We will nally discuss how the same cellular automaton can give rise to both Fermionic eld dynamics and to Maxwell’s equations, that rule the dynamics of the electromagnetic eld. We will conclude reviewing the discussion of the relativity principle, that must be suitably adapted to the scenario where space-time is not an elementary notion, through the denition of a change of inertial reference frame, and whose formulation leads to the recovery of the symmetry of Minkowski space-time, identied with Poincar´e’s group. Space-time thus emerges as one of the manifestations of physical laws, rather than the background where they occur, and its features are determined by the dynamics of systems, necessarily equipped with dierential equations that express it. In brief, there is no space-time unless an evolution rule requires it.