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

Quantum measurements are physical processes. Comment on

Massimiliano Sassoli de Bianchi

Published Jul 3, 2012• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

The validity of the assertion that some recent double-slit interference experiments, conducted by Radin et al., would have tested the possible role of the experimenter's mind in the collapse of the quantum wave function, is questioned. It is emphasized that quantum mechanics doesn't need any psychophysical ingredient to explain the measurement processes, and therefore parapsychologists shouldn't resort to the latter to support the possibility of psychokinesis, but search for more convincing explanations.

Related papers

Quantum measurements are physical processes. Comment on "Consciousness and the double-slit interference pattern: Six experiments," by Dean Radin et al. [Phys. Essays 25, 157 (2012)].

Massimiliano Sassoli de Bianchi

The validity of the assertion that some recent double-slit interference experiments, conducted by Radin et al., would have tested the possible role of the experimenter's mind in the collapse of the quantum wave function, is questioned. It is emphasized that quantum mechanics doesn't need any psychophysical ingredient to explain the measurement processes, and therefore parapsychologists shouldn't resort to the latter to support the possibility of psychokinesis, but search for more convincing explanations.

arXiv:1207.0804•Physics Essays•Mar 1, 2013•5 citations

Psychophysical effects in double-slit interference patterns: Response to a critique

Dean I. Radin, Helané Wahbeh, Leena Michel +1 more

An experiment was conducted to explore possible psychophysical influences on interference patterns generated by an optical double-slit system. The experiment was motivated by a proposed explanation of the quantum measurement problem by John von Neumann and others, namely that consciousness collapses the quantum wavefunction. The study design generated a single database partitioned into eight differential tests, four in experimental conditions where participants alternately directed their attention toward and away from the optical system, and four in sham conditions when no one was present. The planned analysis was comparison of means in attention-toward vs. attention-away conditions; a secondary analysis added later, but before the data were examined, was comparison of variances. After adjusting the eight mean comparisons for multiple testing, none were statistically significant, but one of the eight variance differences was suggestively significant.To date, 11 of 28 conceptual replications of this experiment, reported by four independent teams, have reported statistically significant outcomes (p < 0.05, two-tail), where only one would be expected by chance. Given the implications of psychophysical effects on our understanding of the role of consciousness in the physical world, we encourage others to attempt to replicate this experiment.

•Oct 21, 2019•5 citations

Quantum theories of mind and decoherence

Gregory R. Mulhauser

Two principle concerns prompt some theorists to link quantum mechanics and theories of mind or theories of consciousness. On the one hand, it is commonly thought that conscious minds play some important role in processes of quantum measurement and that any good theory of mind ought to explain how a mind can play such a role. On the other hand, a few people think that the framework of classical physics is not, by itself, sufficiently powerful to explain the myriad remarkable properties of minds and that a good explanation must rely on some special features of quantum mechanics. Usually, these features include either state vector reduction-the collapse of the wave function-or special capabilities, often computational or super-computational ones, allegedly displayed by physical substrates while existing in hypothesised coherent states of linear superposition. Two questions summarise the author's misgivings about both the above motivations for linking quantum mechanics and theories of mind. First, does the process of quantum measurement really require a conscious observer? Second, does quantum mechanics underwrite any special effects in, say, intraneuronal protein lattices, which could play a role in instantiating consciousness in biological systems? It turns out that the particular character of the negative answer suggested for the first question also prompts a negative answer for the second. He summarises these negative answers after describing briefly some popular attempts to forge quantum theories of mind.

•Jan 1, 1997•0 citations

Disappearance of Interference Terms as Quantum Effect

Riuji Mochizuki

We show that it is possible to explain the quantum measurement process within the framework of quantum mechanics without any additional postulates. The key concept of the theory is decoherence, which appears as an inherent characteristic of quantum mechanics and results from the uncertainty relation. In contrast to environment-induced decoherence, this decoherence exists prior to a measurement being made. To clarify our idea, we examine three elemental experiments: a Stern-Gerlach-like experiment, the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm (EPR-Bohm) experiment, and the double-slit experiment. By considering the first experiment, we explain how the uncertainty relation between position and momentum introduces decoherence prior to measurement. Consideration of the EPR-Bohm experiment leads us to conclude that the correlation of the EPR pair is not a consequence of what is known as the collapse of the wave function. Our theory of decoherence can also be applied to experiments with continuous eigenvalues, such as the double-slit experiment. Consideration of the double-slit experiment leads us to understand how pure quantum mechanics describes the fact that quanta behave as interfering particles.

•Apr 12, 2017•0 citations

Foundations of Quantum Mechanics: The Measurement Problem, Entanglement, and the Case Against Consciousness as a Physical Mechanism

Ralph C DeMartino

The measurement problem — the question of why quantum superpositions appear to collapse to definite outcomes upon measurement — remains one of the most consequential unresolved questions in the foundations of physics. Despite the extraordinary empirical success of quantum mechanics, the field has for decades operated under an unofficial norm of interpretive silence, a posture Sean Carroll and others have identified as both intellectually dishonest and scientifically costly. This paper argues that the experimental evidence, properly understood through the framework of quantum entanglement and decoherence, provides strong grounds for rejecting the hypothesis that consciousness plays a causal role in wavefunction collapse. Three tiers of experimental evidence are examined: the double slit experiment with which-path detection, Bell inequality tests confirming non-local entanglement, and the LIGO gravitational wave detections demonstrating macroscopic quantum coherence at cosmological scales without any role for conscious observation. The paper concludes that the consciousness hypothesis is not supported by experimental physics and that Carroll's call for serious investment in foundational research is scientifically justified and philosophically urgent.

•May 9, 2026•0 citations

Decoding the Mystery of Wave Function Collapse

Ping Wang

We provide a reasonable explanation for measurement where no wave function in the sense of quantum mechanics is collapsed. The wave functions of the particles in the measuring device should be considered together with the measured particle as one system. The measurement is actually a physical process which makes the wave functions of different paths orthogonal. The collapsed wave function is just an equivalent one to explain certain physical phenomena. Our understanding of measurement also provides reasonable explanations for both EPR paradox and the experiments of delayed quantum eraser.

Advances in Theoretical & Computational Physics•Nov 18, 2024•0 citations
The validity of the assertion that some recent double-slit interference experiments, conducted by Radin et al., would have tested the possible role of the experimenter's mind in the collapse of the quantum wave function, is questioned. It is emphasized that quantum mechanics doesn't need any psychophysical ingredient to explain the measurement processes, and therefore parapsychologists shouldn't resort to the latter to support the possibility of psychokinesis, but search for more convincing explanations.
The validity of the assertion that some recent double-slit interference experiments, conducted by Radin et al., would have tested the possible role of the experimenter's mind in the collapse of the quantum wave function, is questioned. It is emphasized that quantum mechanics doesn't need any psychophysical ingredient to explain the measurement processes, and therefore parapsychologists shouldn't resort to the latter to support the possibility of psychokinesis, but search for more convincing explanations.
An experiment was conducted to explore possible psychophysical influences on interference patterns generated by an optical double-slit system. The experiment was motivated by a proposed explanation of the quantum measurement problem by John von Neumann and others, namely that consciousness collapses the quantum wavefunction. The study design generated a single database partitioned into eight differential tests, four in experimental conditions where participants alternately directed their attention toward and away from the optical system, and four in sham conditions when no one was present. The planned analysis was comparison of means in attention-toward vs. attention-away conditions; a secondary analysis added later, but before the data were examined, was comparison of variances. After adjusting the eight mean comparisons for multiple testing, none were statistically significant, but one of the eight variance differences was suggestively significant.To date, 11 of 28 conceptual replications of this experiment, reported by four independent teams, have reported statistically significant outcomes (p < 0.05, two-tail), where only one would be expected by chance. Given the implications of psychophysical effects on our understanding of the role of consciousness in the physical world, we encourage others to attempt to replicate this experiment.
Two principle concerns prompt some theorists to link quantum mechanics and theories of mind or theories of consciousness. On the one hand, it is commonly thought that conscious minds play some important role in processes of quantum measurement and that any good theory of mind ought to explain how a mind can play such a role. On the other hand, a few people think that the framework of classical physics is not, by itself, sufficiently powerful to explain the myriad remarkable properties of minds and that a good explanation must rely on some special features of quantum mechanics. Usually, these features include either state vector reduction-the collapse of the wave function-or special capabilities, often computational or super-computational ones, allegedly displayed by physical substrates while existing in hypothesised coherent states of linear superposition. Two questions summarise the author's misgivings about both the above motivations for linking quantum mechanics and theories of mind. First, does the process of quantum measurement really require a conscious observer? Second, does quantum mechanics underwrite any special effects in, say, intraneuronal protein lattices, which could play a role in instantiating consciousness in biological systems? It turns out that the particular character of the negative answer suggested for the first question also prompts a negative answer for the second. He summarises these negative answers after describing briefly some popular attempts to forge quantum theories of mind.
We show that it is possible to explain the quantum measurement process within the framework of quantum mechanics without any additional postulates. The key concept of the theory is decoherence, which appears as an inherent characteristic of quantum mechanics and results from the uncertainty relation. In contrast to environment-induced decoherence, this decoherence exists prior to a measurement being made. To clarify our idea, we examine three elemental experiments: a Stern-Gerlach-like experiment, the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm (EPR-Bohm) experiment, and the double-slit experiment. By considering the first experiment, we explain how the uncertainty relation between position and momentum introduces decoherence prior to measurement. Consideration of the EPR-Bohm experiment leads us to conclude that the correlation of the EPR pair is not a consequence of what is known as the collapse of the wave function. Our theory of decoherence can also be applied to experiments with continuous eigenvalues, such as the double-slit experiment. Consideration of the double-slit experiment leads us to understand how pure quantum mechanics describes the fact that quanta behave as interfering particles.
The measurement problem — the question of why quantum superpositions appear to collapse to definite outcomes upon measurement — remains one of the most consequential unresolved questions in the foundations of physics. Despite the extraordinary empirical success of quantum mechanics, the field has for decades operated under an unofficial norm of interpretive silence, a posture Sean Carroll and others have identified as both intellectually dishonest and scientifically costly. This paper argues that the experimental evidence, properly understood through the framework of quantum entanglement and decoherence, provides strong grounds for rejecting the hypothesis that consciousness plays a causal role in wavefunction collapse. Three tiers of experimental evidence are examined: the double slit experiment with which-path detection, Bell inequality tests confirming non-local entanglement, and the LIGO gravitational wave detections demonstrating macroscopic quantum coherence at cosmological scales without any role for conscious observation. The paper concludes that the consciousness hypothesis is not supported by experimental physics and that Carroll's call for serious investment in foundational research is scientifically justified and philosophically urgent.
We provide a reasonable explanation for measurement where no wave function in the sense of quantum mechanics is collapsed. The wave functions of the particles in the measuring device should be considered together with the measured particle as one system. The measurement is actually a physical process which makes the wave functions of different paths orthogonal. The collapsed wave function is just an equivalent one to explain certain physical phenomena. Our understanding of measurement also provides reasonable explanations for both EPR paradox and the experiments of delayed quantum eraser.