To arbitrate theories of consciousness, scientists need mathematical models of consciousness or qualia. The dominant view regards qualia as points in a dimensional space. Implicit in this view is that qualia can be in principle measured without any effects on it. This contrasts with intuitions and various empirical findings about qualia that they can change when they are measured. How can we deal with entities that are affected by the act of measurement? We argue that mathematical formalisms of quantum theory are precisely developed to deal with such situations. Here, we propose qualia as “observables” (i.e., entities that can be in principle observed), sensory inputs and internal attention as “states” that specify the context that a measurement takes place, and “measurement outcomes” as expected values of qualia observables in a certain state. We propose to call this formalism as the Quantum Qualia (QQ) hypothesis. QQ proposes that qualia observables in a state interact with the world, as if through an interface of sensory inputs and internal attention. This qualia-interface-world scheme has the same mathematical structure as observables-states-environment in quantum theory. Within this framework, mathematical concepts of “instruments” can precisely formalize how measurements can affect (or update) qualia observables and states. QQ naturally explains intuitions about qualia, such as the nature of qualia as indeterminate entities. Finally, QQ leads to empirical predictions that challenge traditional models, such as order effects and violations of Bell inequalities. With further confirmation of such predictions, we believe that QQ will emerge as a viable alternate mathematical model of qualia, offering an important step towards understanding the nature and structures of consciousness.
To arbitrate theories of consciousness, scientists need mathematical models of consciousness or qualia. The dominant view regards qualia as points in a dimensional space. Implicit in this view is that qualia can be in principle measured without any effects on it. This contrasts with intuitions and various empirical findings about qualia that they can change when they are measured. How can we deal with entities that are affected by the act of measurement? We argue that mathematical formalisms of quantum theory are precisely developed to deal with such situations. Here, we propose qualia as “observables” (i.e., entities that can be in principle observed), sensory inputs and internal attention as “states” that specify the context that a measurement takes place, and “measurement outcomes” as expected values of qualia observables in a certain state. We propose to call this formalism as the Quantum Qualia (QQ) hypothesis. QQ proposes that qualia observables in a state interact with the world, as if through an interface of sensory inputs and internal attention. This qualia-interface-world scheme has the same mathematical structure as observables-states-environment in quantum theory. Within this framework, mathematical concepts of “instruments” can precisely formalize how measurements can affect (or update) qualia observables and states. QQ naturally explains intuitions about qualia, such as the nature of qualia as indeterminate entities. Finally, QQ leads to empirical predictions that challenge traditional models, such as order effects and violations of Bell inequalities. With further confirmation of such predictions, we believe that QQ will emerge as a viable alternate mathematical model of qualia, offering an important step towards understanding the nature and structures of consciousness.
To arbitrate theories of consciousness, scientists need to understand mathematical structures of quality of consciousness, or qualia. The dominant view regards qualia as points in a dimensional space. This view implicitly assumes that qualia can be measured without any effects on it. This contrasts with intuitions and empirical findings to show that by means of internal attention qualia can change when they are measured. What is a proper mathematical structure for entities that are affected by the act of measurement? Here we propose the mathematical structure used in quantum theory, in which we consider qualia as “observables” (i.e., entities that can, in principle, be observed), sensory inputs and internal attention as “states” that specify the context that a measurement takes place, and “measurement outcomes” with probabilities that qualia observables take particular values. Based on this mathematical structure, the Quantum-like Qualia (QQ) hypothesis proposes that qualia observables interact with the world, as if through an interface of sensory inputs and internal attention. We argue that this qualia-interface-world scheme has the same mathematical structure as observables-states-environment in quantum theory. Moreover, within this structure, the concept of an “measurement instrument” in quantum theory can precisely model how measurements affect qualia observables and states. We argue that QQ naturally explains known properties of qualia and predicts that qualia are sometimes indeterminate. Such predictions can be empirically determined by the presence of order effects or violations of Bell inequalities. Confirmation of such predictions substantiates our overarching claim that the mathematical structure of QQ will offer novel insights into the nature of consciousness.
To arbitrate theories of consciousness, scientists need to understand mathematical structures of quality of consciousness, or qualia. The dominant view regards qualia as points in a dimensional space. This view implicitly assumes that qualia can be measured without any effect on them. This contrasts with intuitions and empirical findings to show that by means of internal attention qualia can change when they are measured. What is a proper mathematical structure for entities that are affected by the act of measurement? Here we propose the mathematical structure used in quantum theory, in which we consider qualia as "observables" (i.e., entities that can, in principle, be observed), sensory inputs and internal attention as "states" that specify the context that a measurement takes place, and "measurement outcomes" with probabilities that qualia observables take particular values. Based on this mathematical structure, the Quantum-like Qualia (QQ) hypothesis proposes that qualia observables interact with the world, as if through an interface of sensory inputs and internal attention. We argue that this qualia-interface-world scheme has the same mathematical structure as observables-states-environment in quantum theory. Moreover, within this structure, the concept of a "measurement instrument" in quantum theory can precisely model how measurements affect qualia observables and states. We argue that QQ naturally explains known properties of qualia and predicts that qualia are sometimes indeterminate. Such predictions can be empirically determined by the presence of order effects or violations of Bell inequalities. Confirmation of such predictions substantiates our overarching claim that the mathematical structure of QQ will offer novel insights into the nature of consciousness.
Ever since the development of quantum mechanics in the first part of the 20th century, a new world view has emerged. Today, the physicalist objective assumption that objects exist independently of acts of observation has been challenged. The repercussions of this radical challenge to our common-sense perception of the world are far-reaching, although not yet generally realized. Here we argue that there is a complementary view to the way science which is being practiced, and that consciousness itself is primary and qualia form the foundation of experience. We outline the arguments of why the new science of qualia will tie objects that are being perceived to the subjective experience, through the units of subjective experience called qualia. If there is a reality that exists outside of perceptions in consciousness, it is indeed inconceivable. The reason is that once one subtracts everything that one can sense, imagine, feel, or think about, there’s nothing left. Since qualia are subjective, they challenge the dominant world view of science as practiced today, which is reductionist, objective, and mathematical. Our view is a natural continuation of the quantum world view. We outline what the steps will have to be in order to fully develop the science of qualia.
Ever since the development of quantum mechanics in the first part of the 20th century, a new world view has emerged. Today, the physicalist objective assumption that objects exist independently of acts of observation has been challenged. The repercussions of this radical challenge to our common-sense perception of the world are far-reaching, although not yet generally realized. Here we argue that there is a complementary view to the way science which is being practiced, and that consciousness itself is primary and qualia form the foundation of experience. We outline the arguments of why the new science of qualia will tie objects that are being perceived to the subjective experience, through the units of subjective experience called qualia. If there is a reality that exists outside of perceptions in consciousness, it is indeed inconceivable. The reason is that once one subtracts everything that one can sense, imagine, feel, or think about, there’s nothing left. Since qualia are subjective, they challenge the dominant world view of science as practiced today, which is reductionist, objective, and mathematical. Our view is a natural continuation of the quantum world view. We outline what the steps will have to be in order to fully develop the science of qualia.
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.
I propose that qualia are physical because they are directly observable, and revisit the contentious link between consciousness and quantum measurements from a new perspective -- one that does not rely on observers or wave function collapse but instead treats physical measurements as fundamental in a sense resonant with Wheeler's it-from-bit. Building on a mathematical definition of measurement space in physics, I reinterpret it as a model of qualia, effectively equating the measurement problem of quantum mechanics with the hard problem of consciousness. The resulting framework falls within panpsychism, and offers potential solutions to the combination problem. Moreover, some of the mathematical structure of measurement spaces, taken for granted in physics, needs justification for qualia, suggesting that the apparent solidity of physical reality is deeply rooted in how humans process information.