The Extended Mind Thesis holds that mental states are realized in extended physical systems and are not identical with processes occurring inside the brain. A central question raised by this hypothesis is how to model cognition within this extended framework. Here I propose that classical computation can't explain this extension and one rather needs a quantum mechanical description of cognition to help solve the Extended Minds Problem. I develop a computational model of the relationship between quantum information processing and cognition. In particular, I focus on a ramification of Quantum Cognition representing probabilistic relationships amongst information processing units associated directly through reversible local operations performed on data bits. Based on this, I formulate three classes of memory storage incorporating arbitrary permutations allowed during reversible computations which occur both locally as well as nonlocally and act upon inputted data bits and encode initial correlations amongst separate memory elements existing before computation occurred. In conclusion, I dicuss various implications of my work.
The Extended Mind Thesis holds that mental states are realized in extended physical systems and are not identical with processes occurring inside the brain. A central question raised by this hypothesis is how to model cognition within this extended framework. Here I propose that classical computation can't explain this extension and one rather needs a quantum mechanical description of cognition to help solve the Extended Minds Problem. I develop a computational model of the relationship between quantum information processing and cognition. In particular, I focus on a ramification of Quantum Cognition representing probabilistic relationships amongst information processing units associated directly through reversible local operations performed on data bits. Based on this, I formulate three classes of memory storage incorporating arbitrary permutations allowed during reversible computations which occur both locally as well as nonlocally and act upon inputted data bits and encode initial correlations amongst separate memory elements existing before computation occurred. In conclusion, I dicuss various implications of my work.
In recent decades it has become common throughout the social sciences to think of the human mind simply as a very complex computer. Drawing on an older materialist metaphor of the mind as a machine, the “computational” model of the mind took off after the mid-century invention of the computer and subsequent cognitive revolution in psychology, and has since permeated the social sciences in the form of rational choice and other prominent social theories. The contributions of this model have been huge; but it has always been assumed that the computations going on inside our heads are classical. Quantum brain theory challenges this assumption by proposing that the mind is actually a quantum computer. Classical computers are based on binary digits or “bits” with well defined values (0 or 1), which are transformed in serial operations by a program into an output. Quantum computers in contrast are based on “qubits” that can be in superpositions of 0 and 1 at the same time and also interact non-locally, enabling every qubit to be operated on simultaneously. The idea of a quantum computer was first proposed in the 1980s and is still far from being realized technologically, but it has fired the imagination of scientists by raising the prospect of unimaginable increases in computational power, and other neat tricks besides. If quantum brain theory is true, then our model of the mind would be similarly radically altered, irrespective of the issue of consciousness. Quantum brain theory hypothesizes that quantum processes at the elementary level are amplified and kept in superposition at the level of the organism, and then, through downward causation constrain what is going on deep within the brain. On this view, information from the environment is continuously transformed from the macro- to the micro-level, and then channeled back upward into an “internal quantum state,”
ABSTRACT Recent advances at the intersection of quantum physics, neuroscience, and cognitive science have renewed interest in whether quantum phenomena and quantum‐inspired formalisms can inform models of human cognition and decision‐making. While classical neural and computational models explain many aspects of perception and behavior, they face limitations in accounting for contextuality, order effects, probabilistic reasoning violations, ambiguity resolution, and rapid information integration. This review synthesizes evidence and theoretical frameworks linking quantum‐related principles to cognition, with emphasis on quantum sensing in biological systems, molecular and subcellular quantum‐relevant mechanisms, quantum‐to‐classical transition pathways, quantum‐inspired models of perception and decision‐making, and quantum‐inspired computational approaches. It also extends beyond the probabilistic arm of quantum cognition by considering emerging equilibrium‐based and causal‐logical theories, including mental equilibrium, brain‐universe similarity, mind‐light‐matter unity, quantum emergence, and quantum intelligence. Throughout, the review distinguishes physically instantiated quantum mechanisms from abstract quantum‐like formalisms that model contextuality, mental entanglement, and non‐separable cognitive dynamics without requiring sustained macroscopic quantum coherence in the brain. Finally, it identifies methodological challenges and future directions for advancing quantum cognitive science toward experimentally testable and biologically meaningful theories.
The question of whether quantum mechanical phenomena play a functional role in brain activity and the emergence of consciousness remains one of the most controversial yet intellectually stimulating debates at the intersection of physics, neuroscience, and philosophy of mind. This review systematically examines the principal theoretical frameworks proposing quantum-level mechanisms in neural computation, including the Orchestrated Objective Reduction (Orch OR) hypothesis by Penrose and Hameroff, the quantum brain hypothesis of Stapp, quantum coherence models in microtubules, and quantum field theories of consciousness. We critically evaluate the current state of empirical evidence—including recent quantum biology findings, the challenge of decoherence in warm, biological systems, and experimental observations of quantum effects in biological systems—alongside computational models that bridge quantum formalism and neural network dynamics. Furthermore, we discuss the implications of quantum cognition models for understanding perception, decision-making, and memory. Despite significant scientific skepticism, emerging evidence from quantum biology and advanced neuroimaging technologies provides tentative support for quantum processes in neural substrates. We conclude by identifying critical gaps in current knowledge and outlining future research directions that may resolve the debate, including proposals for experimental paradigms using quantum sensing technologies applied to neural tissue. This review aims to serve as a foundational reference for researchers across disciplines approaching the quantum mind hypothesis with scientific rigor.
The majority of quantum models of cognition are based on quantum physical reductionism. Since the brain is composed of quantum systems, one might try to use QM (as a physical theory) to describe such quantum-like features of mind as complementarity (which was well established in psychology long before creation of QM), interference of minds and recently even nonlocality (under the influence of the EPR-Bohr debate and recent results on Bell's inequality). Opposite to the traditional quantum reductionism, we present a quantum-like model of the brain functioning which is not related to the evident fact that the brain is composed of quantum systems. In our model the quantum-like brain is described by the mathematical formalism of QM. However, quantum-like features are generated on the macrolevel - from processing of information on two time scales: precognitive (the quick one) and cognitive (the slow one). Our basic postulate is that the brain operates with averages (encoding mental quantities - images, emotions, minds) of stochastic processes evolving on the precognitive scale and that these averages are computed approximately by using the mathematical formalism of QM.
Classical cognitive psychology has long defaulted to linear, deterministic frameworks when explaining the mechanisms of human consciousness. These models—conceptual descendants of Newtonian mechanics—treat mental states as continuous trajectories where input A reliably produces output B through fixed causal chains. Yet this linear causality stumbles when confronted with the stochastic, non-linear, and frankly paradoxical texture of subjective experience: the phenomenon of profound ambivalence, the simultaneous housing of contradictory emotional states, the discontinuous leaps of insight that characterize complex human cognition. This paper advances a paradigm shift toward what we designate as Quantum Mindfulness—a structural model designed to address the explanatory gaps inherent in traditional linear frameworks. Rather than conceiving the mind as a singular, continuous stream, we reconceptualize it as a composite system of discrete cognitive units operating within a probabilistic field. Within this architecture, consciousness functions through a "superpositional" state of possibilities that resolves into definite experiential states only through specific, observer-directed mechanisms of collapse.
Is mind quantum-like? Is consciousness quantum physical? Does consciousness have a role to play in the emergence of the classical world from the underlying quantum universe? Or is this dichotomy between classical and quantum an illusion? How can world philosophies enrich our views on these matters and interact with the best scientific theories? These are some questions that motivated us to conceive the current book. We also felt an urgent need to discuss the central philosophical questions haunting the emerging frameworks of quantum cognition and quantum-like framework (QLF). We have observed that there are very good technical or mathematical works being done in the emerging fields of quantum cognition and QLF, but there is still a great need for exploring the underlying and open philosophical questions they demand. Quantum cognition developed as a frontier research programme in understanding various cognitive phenomena that are hard or impossible to describe based on classical cognitive science paradigm. Classical cognitive science draws philosophically and mathematically from classical physics and classical probability theory. For example, cognitive realism thinking is deeply motivated by the scientific realism of classical physics. However, as we explore, there are numerous empirical findings which demonstrate clearly that human mind and cognitive processes exhibit features that are more quantum-like. Central to these features are indeterminacy, context dependence, and complementarity of cognitive phenomena, for example, perception, information retrieval, and even qualia. Many good works in the previous decade have demonstrated the efficacy of quantum-like mathematical modelling in such cases. However, given that efficacy, we cannot simply conclude that mind is quantum. Rather there are features that go beyond what is allowed in standard quantum formalism.