What is an observer? What is an observation? How do observations inform beliefs? What is the relationship between observers and physical objects in spacetime? These are central, and as yet unresolved, questions in the foundations of physics and consciousness science. We propose an answer taking consciousness as fundamental, resulting in a theory of conscious agents whose mutual interaction is governed by Markov chains. We describe observation via a new trace order on Markov chains. In this context, no observer is aloof: it must be an integral part of any system it observes. We find that the trace order forms a non-Boolean logic, mapping homomorphically to the “Lebesgue” logic” of probabilistic beliefs. We explore implications of conscious agent theory for the “hard problem” of consciousness, and propose a route to empirical tests using data from scattering experiments with subatomic particles.
What is an observer? What is an observation? How do observations inform beliefs? What is the relationship between observers and physical objects in spacetime? These are central, and as yet unresolved, questions in the foundations of physics and consciousness science. We propose an answer taking consciousness as fundamental, resulting in a theory of conscious agents whose mutual interaction is governed by Markov chains. We describe observation via a new trace order on Markov chains. In this context, no observer is aloof: it must be an integral part of any system it observes. We find that the trace order forms a non-Boolean logic, mapping homomorphically to the “Lebesgue” logic” of probabilistic beliefs. We explore implications of conscious agent theory for the “hard problem” of consciousness, and propose a route to empirical tests using data from scattering experiments with subatomic particles.
What are conscious experiences? Can they combine to form new experiences? What are conscious subjects? Can they combine to form new subjects? Most attempts to answer these questions assume that spacetime, and some of its particles, are fundamental. However, physicists tell us that spacetime cannot be fundamental. Spacetime, they say, is doomed. We heed the physicists, and drop the assumption that spacetime is fundamental. We assume instead that subjects and experiences are entities beyond spacetime, not within spacetime. We make this precise in a mathematical theory of conscious agents, whose dynamics are described by Markov chains. We show how (1) agents combine into more complex agents, (2) agents fuse into simpler agents, and (3) qualia fuse to create new qualia. The possible dynamics of n agents form an n(n−1)-dimensional polytope with nn vertices—the Markov polytopeMn. The total fusions of n agents and qualia form an (n−1)-dimensional simplex—the fusion simplexFn. To project the Markovian dynamics of conscious agents onto scattering processes in spacetime, we define a new map from Markov chains to decorated permutations. Such permutations—along with helicities, or masses and spins—invariantly encode all physical information used to compute scattering amplitudes. We propose that spacetime and scattering processes are a data structure that codes for interactions of conscious agents: a particle in spacetime is a projection of the Markovian dynamics of a communicating class of conscious agents.
Creating machines that are conscious is a long term objective of research in artificial intelligence. This paper look at this idea with new arguments from physics and logic. Observers have no place in classical physics, and although they play a role in measurement in quantum physics there is no explanation for their emergence within the framework. There is suggestion that consciousness, which is implicitly a property of the observer, is a consequence of the complexity of specific brain structures, but this is problematic because one associates free will with consciousness, which goes counter to causal closure of physics. Considering a nested physical system, we argue that even if the system were assumed to have agency, observers cannot exist within it. Since complex systems can be viewed in nested hierarchies, this constitutes a proof against consciousness as a product of complexity, for then we will have nested system of conscious agents. As the existence of consciousness in cognitive agents cannot be denied, the implication is that consciousness belongs to a dimension that is not physical and machine consciousness is unattainable. These ideas are used to take a fresh look at two well-known paradoxes of quantum theory that are important in quantum information theory.
Current models of visual perception typically assume that human vision estimates true properties of physical objects, properties that exist even if unperceived. However, recent studies of perceptual evolution, using evolutionary games and genetic algorithms, reveal that natural selection often drives true perceptions to extinction when they compete with perceptions tuned to fitness rather than truth: Perception guides adaptive behavior; it does not estimate a preexisting physical truth. Moreover, shifting from evolutionary biology to quantum physics, there is reason to disbelieve in preexisting physical truths: Certain interpretations of quantum theory deny that dynamical properties of physical objects have definite values when unobserved. In some of these interpretations the observer is fundamental, and wave functions are compendia of subjective probabilities, not preexisting elements of physical reality. These two considerations, from evolutionary biology and quantum physics, suggest that current models of object perception require fundamental reformulation. Here we begin such a reformulation, starting with a formal model of consciousness that we call a "conscious agent." We develop the dynamics of interacting conscious agents, and study how the perception of objects and space-time can emerge from such dynamics. We show that one particular object, the quantum free particle, has a wave function that is identical in form to the harmonic functions that characterize the asymptotic dynamics of conscious agents; particles are vibrations not of strings but of interacting conscious agents. This allows us to reinterpret physical properties such as position, momentum, and energy as properties of interacting conscious agents, rather than as preexisting physical truths. We sketch how this approach might extend to the perception of relativistic quantum objects, and to classical objects of macroscopic scale.
The hard problem in consciousness is the problem of understanding how physical processes in the brain could give rise to subjective conscious experience. In this paper, I suggest that in order to understand the relationship between consciousness and the physical world, we need to probe deeply into the nature of physical reality. This leads us to quantum physics and to a second explanatory gap: that between quantum and classical reality. I will seek a philosophical framework that can address these two gaps simultaneously. Our analysis of quantum mechanics will naturally lead us to the notion of a hidden reality and to the postulate that consciousness is an integral component of this reality. The framework proposed in the paper provides the philosophical underpinnings for a theory of consciousness while satisfactorily resolving the interpretation problem in quantum mechanics without the need to alter its mathematical structure. I also discuss some implications for a scientific theory of consciousness.
The measurement problem in physics remains an unresolved challenge characterized by significant conceptual complexity. Paradoxically, mainstream scientific discourse has often sidestepped this issue by invoking processes such as the 'collapse of the wavefunction'—a mechanism that, to this day, lacks a rigorous definition. This framework has primarily served as a pragmatic way to bypass the problem, allowing the inherent subjectivity introduced by the observer to be overlooked. In this article, I aim to provide a detailed exposition of the measurement problem and trace its underlying causes. A case will be made for integrating perspectives from the Philosophy of Science to address this issue systematically. Furthermore, I will explore the critical necessity of developing a robust theory of consciousness, which may provide deeper insights into the measurement problem. By investigating the foundational principles of such a theory, this work seeks to illuminate the intricate relationship between Quantum Theory and Consciousness, potentially offering a more unified understanding of these fundamental phenomena.
Herein we are not interested in merely using dynamical systems theory, graph theory, information theory, etc., to model the relationship between brain dynamics and networks, and various states and degrees of conscious processes. We are interested in the question of how phenomenal conscious experience and fundamental physics are most deeply related. Any attempt to mathematically and formally model conscious experience and its relationship to physics must begin with some metaphysical assumption in mind about the nature of conscious experience, the nature of matter and the nature of the relationship between them. These days the most prominent metaphysical fixed points are strong emergence or some variant of panpsychism. In this paper we will detail another distinct metaphysical starting point known as neutral monism. In particular, we will focus on a variant of the neutral monism of William James and Bertrand Russell. Rather than starting with physics as fundamental, as both strong emergence and panpsychism do in their own way, our goal is to suggest how one might derive fundamental physics from neutral monism. Thus, starting with two axioms grounded in our characterization of neutral monism, we will sketch out a derivation of and explanation for some key features of relativity and quantum mechanics that suggest a unity between those two theories that is generally unappreciated. Our mode of explanation throughout will be of the principle as opposed to constructive variety in something like Einstein's sense of those terms. We will argue throughout that a bias towards property dualism and a bias toward reductive dynamical and constructive explanation lead to the hard problem and the explanatory gap in consciousness studies, and lead to serious unresolved problems in fundamental physics, such as the measurement problem and the mystery of entanglement in quantum mechanics and lack of progress in producing an empirically well-grounded theory of quantum gravity. We hope to show that given our take on neutral monism and all that follows from it, the aforementioned problems can be satisfactorily resolved leaving us with a far more intuitive and commonsense model of the relationship between conscious experience and physics.