The Human Observer

Göte Nyman

The problem of the observer in quantum mechanics is getting new human content. The paradox of Wigner's friend and its extended versions have observers who not only observe quantum phenomena, but communicate, have memories and even super-observer powers. Observers are represented by particle paths and state memories and advanced AI has been suggested to act as an observer. There is a new call for a solid theory of the observer in quantum mechanics. Two different branches of observer theories have emerged. The purely physical one is Heisenbergian, e.g. relational quantum mechanics where the observer is considered as any other physical quantum system. The other branch is psychologically rich as its observer has complex human faculties such as a mind, mental states and memory (Many minds), or the observer is considered as an active and experiencing agent, with continuously refreshed, scientific expectations (QBism). Is the human observer a special case, different from other quantum mechanical systems? Why is there no theory of the general observer in quantum mechanics? A historical summary is covered on how quantum mechanical interpretations have treated the observer, and the concept of hidden human variables is suggested to continue the discussion on the theoretical nature of the observer.

NAPOLEON CAMUS M. HERMOSO

B. C. Chauhan

However, the observations encompassed by classical physics excludes the observer from the physical reality, yet the deep-down understandung of nature --{\it the quantum theory}-- can not avoid the intrusion of observer into the measurement process. Indeed, the quantum physics experiments have knocked the door of a new paradigm: in which science of consciousness is an important axiom. In the present work, it is argued --by taking into account of the views of learned scientists and philosophers-- that modern science is incomplete and lacking something in the basic understanding of nature \cite{r}. Classical physics has failed to explain the dynamics of the microscopic particles, eventhough modern scientific researches are based upon the prejudice posed by classical physics: keeping the outer physical universe as a separate entity, that is something quite independent of the observer --human mind. One should not forget that human-being is a part of nature and human mind is an essential component of our observations. Basically, it is the observer --the consciousness-- which makes perception possible. The working of human mind must be included in our scientific theories. In fact, human free will is an illusion and nothing in the entire universe (with life) lies outside the domain of science and determinism.

Dean I. Radin, Ron Cline

The von Neumann‐Wigner framework holds that wavefunction collapse is incomplete until a conscious observer intervenes. Wheeler argued that measurement choices can be deferred until after a photon transits the apparatus. Together, these ideas raise fundamental questions: What is an observer, and when does observation become definite? To investigate, diffraction-grating data recorded months before human observation drove an online animated candle flame across 1000 human and 1000 AI-agent sessions. Sessions alternated ten 30-s intention epochs (intending flame dimming) and ten relax epochs. One first-order diffraction spot drove the display; the other served as an unobserved control. Participants were blind to the control and prerecording; assignments were randomized. The observed sensor was regressed against the unobserved sensor, and slopes compared via label-swapping permutations. Of eight possible outcomes, only the human‐observed‐intention cell was significant after multiple-comparison correction ( p = 0.000 07). AI agents showed no effect. Pre- and post-preregistration windows were statistically equivalent. These results suggest an effect of human consciousness rather than an artifact due to hardware drift or analytical artifacts.

George Jaroszkiewicz