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

arXiv:quant-ph/0108039

Mindless Sensationalism: A Quantum Framework for Consciousness

Don Nelson Page

Published Aug 8, 2001• 1 citation
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

The ideas of Sensible Quantum Mechanics are expressed in lay terms for philosophers of consciousness and others. A framework is proposed and explained for the `psycho-physical-parallelism' between conscious experiences and the mathematical structures of quantum physics (e.g., a set of quantum operators obeying some algebra, and a quantum state giving the expectation value of each operator). In particular, it is proposed that each set of possible conscious experiences has a measure given by the expectation value of a corresponding operator (a positive-operator-valued measure). Then one has a generalization of the Weak Anthropic Principle named the Conditional Aesthemic Principle: given that we are conscious beings, our conscious experiences are likely to be typical experiences in the set of all conscious experiences with its measure.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/0108039

Related papers

Sensible Quantum Mechanics: Are Only Perceptions Probabilistic?

Don Nelson Page

Quantum mechanics may be formulated as Sensible Quantum Mechanics (SQM) so that it contains nothing probabilistic, except, in a certain frequency sense, conscious perceptions. Sets of these perceptions can be deterministically realized with measures given by expectation values of positive-operator-valued awareness operators in a quantum state of the universe which never jumps or collapses. Ratios of the measures for these sets of perceptions can be interpreted as frequency-type probabilities for many actually existing sets rather than as propensities for potentialities to be actualized, so there is nothing indeterministic in SQM. These frequency-type probabilities generally cannot be given by the ordinary quantum "probabilities" for a single set of alternatives. Probabilism, or ascribing probabilities to unconscious aspects of the world, may be seen to be an aesthemamorphic myth. No fundamental correlation or equivalence is postulated between different perceptions (each being the entirety of a single conscious experience and thus not in direct contact with any other), so SQM, a variant of Everett's "many-worlds" framework, is a "many-perceptions" framework but not a "many-minds" framework. Different detailed SQM theories may be tested against experienced perceptions by the typicalities (defined herein) they predict for these perceptions. One may adopt the Conditional Aesthemic Principle: among the set of all conscious perceptions, our perceptions are likely to be typical. An experimental test is proposed to compare SQM with a variant, SQMn.

arXiv:quant-ph/9506010•Jun 7, 1995•28 citations

Consciousness and the Quantum

Don Nelson Page

Sensible Quantum Mechanics or Mindless Sensationalism is a framework for relating consciousness to a quantum universe. It states that each conscious perception has a measure that is given by the expectation value of a corresponding quantum "awareness operator" in a fixed quantum state of the universe. The measures can be interpreted as frequency-type probabilities for a large set of perceptions that all actually exist with varying degrees of reality, so detailed theories within this framework are testable. The measures are not propensities for potentialities to be actualized, so there is nothing indeterministic in this framework, and no free will in the incompatibilistic sense. As conscious perceptions are determined by the awareness operators and the quantum state, they are epiphenomena. No fundamental relation is postulated between different perceptions (each being the entirety of a single conscious experience and thus not in direct contact with any other), so SQM or MS, a variant of Everett's "many-worlds" framework, is a "many-perceptions" framework but not a "many-minds" framework.

arXiv:1102.5339•Feb 25, 2011•18 citations

Mindless Sensationalism: A Quantum Framework for Consciousness

Donn. Page

Abstract I write as a physicist, with the knowledge that many physicists are studying the mathematical structure of our physical universe and hope to be able to find a ‘theory of everything’, or TOE, that will give a complete set of dynamical laws for this structure. This would essentially give the rules for how all the physical quantities in the universe evolve. Such a TOE would not by itself give the boundary conditions also necessary to determine the history of the universe, so it is a misnomer to say that it is a ‘theory of everything’, but it is convenient to retain the acronym TOE for this dynamical part of the laws of physics. Some physicists, such as Hartle and Hawking (1983), are also seeking to find rules specifying the boundary conditions (BC) of the universe. The combination of the TOE and the BC would then give a complete description of the mathematics of the state of the universe and its evolution.

•Jan 23, 2003•23 citations

Quantum-consciousness link revisited

Sudip Patra, Menas C. Kafatos

In the previous chapter, we referred to dual-aspect monism frames; we observe here that whether the psycho-physically neutral reality in such frames may refer to consciousness is an open question. By consciousness, however, we mean fundamental awareness, not functional consciousness, which is conventionally meant by materialistic or physicalist frames. We will turn to the issue of fundamental consciousness in the next two chapters. In this chapter, we explore possible links between consciousness (fundamental or not) and quantum mechanics (QM), and insights for quantum-like framework (QLF) or psycho-physical reality in general. Consciousness is, by far, the most enigmatic issue to conceptualise in modern science. The mainstream direction is materialism, where consciousness is an emergent phenomenon from matter, which has been given the name the hard problem. Emergence can be of different types, for example, weak and strong (goes by other names like epistemic and ontic or metaphysical, respectively). While in the case of weak emergence, in principle, higher-level descriptions of realities can be reduced to fundamental descriptions, in the strong emergence view, higher-level descriptions of realities have their own effective dynamical laws which are irreducible.

Routledge eBooks•May 26, 2026•0 citations

SENSIBLE QUANTUM MECHANICS: ARE PROBABILITIES ONLY IN THE MIND?

DON N. PAGE

Quantum mechanics may be formulated as Sensible Quantum Mechanics (SQM) so that it contains nothing probabilistic except conscious perceptions. Sets of these perceptions can be deterministically realized with measures given by expectation values of positive-operator-valued awareness operators. Ratios of the measures for these sets of perceptions can be interpreted as frequency-type probabilities for many actually existing sets. These probabilities generally cannot be given by the ordinary quantum “probabilities” for a single set of alternatives. Probabilism, or ascribing probabilities to unconscious aspects of the world, may be seen to be an aesthemamorphic myth.

arXiv:gr-qc/9507024•International Journal of Modern Physics D•Dec 1, 1996•76 citations

The Physical Foundations of Life and Consciousness, Framework 1.x

Suresh K Maran

In this paper, I propose a set of ideas to explain the phenomena of life and consciousness in the universe and their relation to the interpretation of quantum mechanics. Consciousness is described as a result of specific dynamical configurations of matter and fields aided by fundamental properties of nature proposed in this paper. First, I review the various theories of consciousness in current literature and come up with various hypotheses, definitions, and propositions to build a physical theory of consciousness. I introduce the concept of interaction binding of consciousness and discuss in detail how the brain gives rise to consciousness. I propose three sets of postulates on the physical foundations of consciousness from a quantum general relativistic background using the Quantum General Relativistic Framework, 5 proposals to understand time and reduction. A Quantum Reduction Free Will Equivalence Principle is discussed to link quantum reduction to conscious free will. I discuss the potential possibility of retrocausal effects on consciousness-influenced reduction probability. I discuss the concept of conscious being as a more general concept than conscious identity, as separate from conscious content, and its nature. I introduce the concept of classicum as an analog of the quantum, and discuss its relation to consciousness. I discuss mathematical measures to calculate the complexity of harmonic relational structures. I put these together in a set of propositions on the nature of consciousness and its relation to the nature of quantum phenomena. I discuss a mathematical model of interaction binding, and free will. I discuss theory and experiments to verify these

•May 4, 2024•0 citations
The ideas of Sensible Quantum Mechanics are expressed in lay terms for philosophers of consciousness and others. A framework is proposed and explained for the `psycho-physical-parallelism' between conscious experiences and the mathematical structures of quantum physics (e.g., a set of quantum operators obeying some algebra, and a quantum state giving the expectation value of each operator). In particular, it is proposed that each set of possible conscious experiences has a measure given by the expectation value of a corresponding operator (a positive-operator-valued measure). Then one has a generalization of the Weak Anthropic Principle named the Conditional Aesthemic Principle: given that we are conscious beings, our conscious experiences are likely to be typical experiences in the set of all conscious experiences with its measure.
Quantum mechanics may be formulated as Sensible Quantum Mechanics (SQM) so that it contains nothing probabilistic, except, in a certain frequency sense, conscious perceptions. Sets of these perceptions can be deterministically realized with measures given by expectation values of positive-operator-valued awareness operators in a quantum state of the universe which never jumps or collapses. Ratios of the measures for these sets of perceptions can be interpreted as frequency-type probabilities for many actually existing sets rather than as propensities for potentialities to be actualized, so there is nothing indeterministic in SQM. These frequency-type probabilities generally cannot be given by the ordinary quantum "probabilities" for a single set of alternatives. Probabilism, or ascribing probabilities to unconscious aspects of the world, may be seen to be an aesthemamorphic myth. No fundamental correlation or equivalence is postulated between different perceptions (each being the entirety of a single conscious experience and thus not in direct contact with any other), so SQM, a variant of Everett's "many-worlds" framework, is a "many-perceptions" framework but not a "many-minds" framework. Different detailed SQM theories may be tested against experienced perceptions by the typicalities (defined herein) they predict for these perceptions. One may adopt the Conditional Aesthemic Principle: among the set of all conscious perceptions, our perceptions are likely to be typical. An experimental test is proposed to compare SQM with a variant, SQMn.
Sensible Quantum Mechanics or Mindless Sensationalism is a framework for relating consciousness to a quantum universe. It states that each conscious perception has a measure that is given by the expectation value of a corresponding quantum "awareness operator" in a fixed quantum state of the universe. The measures can be interpreted as frequency-type probabilities for a large set of perceptions that all actually exist with varying degrees of reality, so detailed theories within this framework are testable. The measures are not propensities for potentialities to be actualized, so there is nothing indeterministic in this framework, and no free will in the incompatibilistic sense. As conscious perceptions are determined by the awareness operators and the quantum state, they are epiphenomena. No fundamental relation is postulated between different perceptions (each being the entirety of a single conscious experience and thus not in direct contact with any other), so SQM or MS, a variant of Everett's "many-worlds" framework, is a "many-perceptions" framework but not a "many-minds" framework.
Abstract I write as a physicist, with the knowledge that many physicists are studying the mathematical structure of our physical universe and hope to be able to find a ‘theory of everything’, or TOE, that will give a complete set of dynamical laws for this structure. This would essentially give the rules for how all the physical quantities in the universe evolve. Such a TOE would not by itself give the boundary conditions also necessary to determine the history of the universe, so it is a misnomer to say that it is a ‘theory of everything’, but it is convenient to retain the acronym TOE for this dynamical part of the laws of physics. Some physicists, such as Hartle and Hawking (1983), are also seeking to find rules specifying the boundary conditions (BC) of the universe. The combination of the TOE and the BC would then give a complete description of the mathematics of the state of the universe and its evolution.
In the previous chapter, we referred to dual-aspect monism frames; we observe here that whether the psycho-physically neutral reality in such frames may refer to consciousness is an open question. By consciousness, however, we mean fundamental awareness, not functional consciousness, which is conventionally meant by materialistic or physicalist frames. We will turn to the issue of fundamental consciousness in the next two chapters. In this chapter, we explore possible links between consciousness (fundamental or not) and quantum mechanics (QM), and insights for quantum-like framework (QLF) or psycho-physical reality in general. Consciousness is, by far, the most enigmatic issue to conceptualise in modern science. The mainstream direction is materialism, where consciousness is an emergent phenomenon from matter, which has been given the name the hard problem. Emergence can be of different types, for example, weak and strong (goes by other names like epistemic and ontic or metaphysical, respectively). While in the case of weak emergence, in principle, higher-level descriptions of realities can be reduced to fundamental descriptions, in the strong emergence view, higher-level descriptions of realities have their own effective dynamical laws which are irreducible.
Quantum mechanics may be formulated as Sensible Quantum Mechanics (SQM) so that it contains nothing probabilistic except conscious perceptions. Sets of these perceptions can be deterministically realized with measures given by expectation values of positive-operator-valued awareness operators. Ratios of the measures for these sets of perceptions can be interpreted as frequency-type probabilities for many actually existing sets. These probabilities generally cannot be given by the ordinary quantum “probabilities” for a single set of alternatives. Probabilism, or ascribing probabilities to unconscious aspects of the world, may be seen to be an aesthemamorphic myth.
In this paper, I propose a set of ideas to explain the phenomena of life and consciousness in the universe and their relation to the interpretation of quantum mechanics. Consciousness is described as a result of specific dynamical configurations of matter and fields aided by fundamental properties of nature proposed in this paper. First, I review the various theories of consciousness in current literature and come up with various hypotheses, definitions, and propositions to build a physical theory of consciousness. I introduce the concept of interaction binding of consciousness and discuss in detail how the brain gives rise to consciousness. I propose three sets of postulates on the physical foundations of consciousness from a quantum general relativistic background using the Quantum General Relativistic Framework, 5 proposals to understand time and reduction. A Quantum Reduction Free Will Equivalence Principle is discussed to link quantum reduction to conscious free will. I discuss the potential possibility of retrocausal effects on consciousness-influenced reduction probability. I discuss the concept of conscious being as a more general concept than conscious identity, as separate from conscious content, and its nature. I introduce the concept of classicum as an analog of the quantum, and discuss its relation to consciousness. I discuss mathematical measures to calculate the complexity of harmonic relational structures. I put these together in a set of propositions on the nature of consciousness and its relation to the nature of quantum phenomena. I discuss a mathematical model of interaction binding, and free will. I discuss theory and experiments to verify these