|
Christian de Quincey |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
COMMUNICATIONS |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Scrapbook |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Sitemap |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
Quantum Consciousness Can quantum paradoxes throw light on consciousness? Mind, Brain, & Quantum: Four Approaches to Understanding the Quantum-Consciousness Relationship 1. Metaphorical Quantum physics as a model or metaphor for how consciousness works (Jung & Pauli; Valle) 2. Mechanism Quantum physics as a mechanism for how consciousness happens (Hameroff; Zohar) 3. Implicate Order Quantum physics as entry-point to understanding a reality deeper even than quantum physics (Bohm; Jung & Pauli) 4. Quantum as Consciousness Quantum physics as first step in a radical idealist science of spirit (Young; Goswami) Why Quantum Physics? What’s so special about quantum physics that it could throw light on the nature of consciousness? • What is the Quantum? The quantum is often called “a packet of energy” or “an ‘atom’ of energy.” More accurately, it is a packet or a unit of action. It was named by Max Planck who discovered that energy is always radiated in whole bundles (“quantum” means bundle). There are no partial quanta. They always come in wholes. Thus, the quantum is the smallest, indivisible, unit of physical reality. It is the root (some would say “source”) of the physical world. But it is a very strange physical entity. The quantum wonderland is a domain of paradoxes that strain the grasp of reason and imagination. It is a domain where the world of physical things seems to “evaporate” into a dance of surreal events. A world where the relationship between mind and matter becomes blurred. Paradoxes of Quantum Physics i). Paradox of wave-particle duality A particle occupies a small amount of space. A wave is spread over wide space. Yet experiments show that light quanta (photons) behave both as particles and waves. Paradox: How can something be both confined to a small space and also spread out over space? • Experiment 1: Double-slit interference (Thomas Young) showed that light behaves as waves by creating interference patterns of patches of brightness and darkness. • Experiment 2: Photoelectric effect (Albert Einstein) explained how light can knock electrons from certain metals (e.g. silver bromide) as one kind of particle (photon) striking another kind of particle (electron). Whether a quantum behaves as a particle or a wave depends on the kind of experiment performed. A quantum never behaves as both particle and wave in same experiment. Yet it has the capacity, or nature, to be either. A quantum is, thus, a “wavicle.” Particle and wave natures are mutually exclusive (the appearance of one automatically rules out the other). Yet both natures are necessary for a full accounting of the quantum. Wave and particle are complementary. ii). Paradox of uncertainty & indeterminacy Quantum theory and experiment show that it is impossible to measure precisely the position and momentum of a quantum “particle.” Knowledge of one precludes knowledge of the other. In other words, we can never have certain knowledge of both where a particle is located and how fast it is moving. Not only are position and momentum uncertain in this way; all quantum events have a degree of intrinsic uncertainty. Heisenberg showed that the uncertainty is not a consequence of unsophisticated instruments or ignorance. The uncertainty is built into the very fabric of quantum reality itself. This is called: “Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle.” The uncertainty is intrinsic to all quantum events, so that we can never predict when or where a quantum event will happen. We cannot know the cause of a quantum event—because quantum events are uncaused. Randomness is intrinsic to quantum events. Mystery: How can something happen without a cause? • Quantum events are totally random; or • Quantum events are “caused” by hidden “implicate order”; or • Quantum events involve inherent “choice.” iii). Paradox of participant-observer Quantum theory describes reality as a “field” of superimposed “probability waves” (Schrödinger “wave equations” or “wave functions”). Quantum reality exists in multiple states of “both/and.” All possibilities described by the wave equations exist simultaneously. Manifest reality happens when one of these possibilities is “selected”—and this happens only when the quantum system is observed. This is called the “collapse of the (Schrödinger ) wave function.” For reality to become “particularized” (for a definite particle to appear from a sea of indefinite wave possibilities), it must first be observed. In other words, the observer is a necessary and integral part of (or participant in) the quantum system. Paradox: How can an “observer” be simultaneously a “participant”? The observer—the scientist—participates in the quantum system by choosing which experiment to do (e.g. whether for a wave or a particle). This means that the observer’s consciousness participates in the quantum system by “collapsing” the wave function. Mystery: How can consciousness reach into the domain of quantum wave probabilities and “pluck” out a particular reality? How can consciousness collapse the wave function? iv). Paradox of nonlocality Perhaps the greatest challenge to normal science’s understanding of the nature of reality is the phenomenon of nonlocality. When two quantum “particles” (e.g. photons) are separated in space, they continue to behave as though there is no space between them. The behavior of one is always correlated with the behavior of its partner—no matter how far apart they are in space! Paradox: How can two things be separated in space, yet have no space between them? Either: • Photons communicate at speeds faster than light; or • Photons somehow remain connected parts of the one undivided system. The first violates Einstein’s relativity (i.e. nothing can move faster than light); the second means that at the quantum level everything is interconnected. The nature of the universe is unbroken wholeness. In other words, at the quantum level (which underlies the entire physical world) reality is nonlocal. “Nonlocality” means no space separates any “parts” of the whole . Reality is not localized. It is interconnected everywhere. Quantum-Consciousness Relationship: Four Approaches 1. Quantum as Metaphor for Consciousness Classical physics could shed no light on the nature of consciousness—because, unlike matter, mind could not fit the criteria and methodology of standard science: measurement, separate-identity, determinism, reductionism, objectivity. But quantum physics challenges each of these criteria. The quantum possesses many characteristics reminiscent of consciousness. If nothing else, the quantum provides researchers with scientific images or metaphors for consciousness. For instance, like the quantum: • Metaphor of Uncertainty Consciousness cannot be measured or “pinned down” with precision (non-measurement); • Metaphor of Wave-Particle Complementarity Consciousness is not restricted to “either/or” alternatives; it often involves “both/and” (e.g. both “first-person” and “third-person” perspectives) (non-identity or dual-perspective); • Metaphor of Indeterminacy Consciousness operates via volition or choice which overrides determinism, and which is the opposite of randomness (non-determinism); • Metaphor of Nonlocality and of Holism/Interrelatedness Consciousness cannot be divided up into separate parts or localized in space (non-reductionism); • Metaphor of Participant-Observer Consciousness research involves the “observer” in the system being investigated (non-objectivity). Carl Jung’s Quantum Metaphor of Consciousness Consciousness involves synchronistic events which are “a-causal” manifestations of mind-matter relationships. Along with physicist Wolfgang Pauli, Jung likened synchronicities to the indeterminism of the quantum, and to the mind-matter relationship of the observer’s consciousness involved in the “collapse of the wave function.” Jung and Pauli also likened the nonspatial nature of psychic archetypes to the nonlocality of quantum events. Ronald Valle’s Quantum Metaphor of Consciousness Valle compared the wave-like nature of the stream of consciousness to the wave-nature of quantum events. He compared specific thoughts and actions to the particle-nature of quanta. And he compared the volitional capacity of consciousness to the indeterminate “probability waves” of quantum theory. (See R. Valle, “Relativistic Quantum Psychology,”in Metaphors of Consciousness) 2. Quantum as Mechanism for Consciousness Whereas Jung, Pauli, and Valle turned to quantum physics for metaphors that could describe how consciousness works, other theorists, such as Stuart Hameroff and Dana Zohar, have put forward mechanistic models of the mind—where consciousness is presumed to be generated by quantum events happening at the level of subneuronal microtubules (Hameroff), or at the level of electrons in the proteins of neural membranes (Zohar). Both Hameroff and Zohar see the phenomenon of “quantum coherence” as a clue to many of the distinctive properties of consciousness. Hameroff: Solving the ‘Binding Problem’ Stuart Hameroff defines consciousness as “an emergent macroscopic quantum state driven or selected by neurobiological mechanisms. . . with origins in quantum coherence in cytoskeletal microtubules within the brain’s neurons.” Hameroff proposes coherent patterning of innumerable submicroscopic structures (“microtubules”) inside the brain’s neurons as the physical basis of consciousness. He agrees with Francis Crick and Cristof Koch that coherent firing of widely-distributed neurons in the brain is a candidate for explaining the mystery of the “binding problem” in consciousness. Essentially, the “binding problem” is this: How can multiple brain-wide activities (in innumerable neurons and synapses) result in a “singular perceptual entity”—namely the experience of a unified consciousness or “self.” Hameroff’s answer: Nonlocal quantum coherence within and between the microtubules in the brain’s neurons results in quantum interconnectedness of multiple brain events that are experienced as a “unitary sense of self.” Hameroff on “Free-will” and “Intuition” Hameroff also points to quantum indeterminacy to explain free will; and to quantum superposition of multiple “probability waves” to account for intuition. Hameroff on “Funda-Mentality” While impressed by the scientific evidence for quantum coherence to provide a physical basis for consciousness, Hameroff, sensing the philosophical difficulty of explaining how consciousness could “emerge” from events that in themselves are nonconscious, has tilted in the direction of panpsychism or radical materialism. He has suggested that a double-aspect “funda-mentality” (involving physicality and mentality) is intrinsic to the nature of quantum reality at its deepest levels. Thus consciousness (or “mentality”) would not be generated by purely physical quantum coherence, but—being “fundamental”—could actually play a role in directing it; (Hameroff has not yet gone this far). Zohar: Bose-Einstein Condensates Dana Zohar takes a view of quantum coherence similar to Hameroff’s. However, whereas he comes close to reducing consciousness to quantum mechanisms in the “microtubules” of the brain’s neurons, she goes a level deeper and suggests that consciousness may be the product of the coherent alignment of electrons in proteins in the neurons’ membranes, or of electrons in the water of the neurons. The technical term for this coherence of electrons (after their discoverers) is the “Bose-Einstein Condensates”— which are the most coherent structures known. The “condensates” are quantum superpositions of multiple brain states (or of parts of the brain). Zohar explains the Bose-Einstein condensates as “separate bits [of the brain’s neurons which] are so overlapped and entangled with each other that they behave as though there is just one large molecule present.” This “one large quantum molecule” is the physical basis for unitary consciousness and the sense of self. She says: “Our thoughts and perceptions may be excitations of a comparable Bose-Einstein condensate in the brain,”like waves on a pond. In other words, the brain’s B-E condensates—which are spread over the brain—are like a quantum-electronic “pond,”and mental events (such as thoughts and perceptions) are like waves on the pond. Zohar’s ‘Double-Aspectism’ Like Hameroff, Zohar’s philosophical intuitions nudge her beyond mechanism, reductionism, and materialism. Instead of saying outright that Bose-Einstein condensates are the material cause of consciousness, she takes a double-aspect position. She proposes that at the deep level of quantum events (such as Bose-Einstein condensates) reality is neither mental nor material. The quantum is some third “thing” or process which gives rise to both mind and matter. “Both mind and matter are derived from the quantum realm,” she says. [See D. Zohar, “Consciousness and Bose-Eistein Condensates,”in Toward a Science of Consciousness; and The Quantum Self.] 3. Beyond the Quantum: Implicate Order Zohar sees the quantum as a deep, “dual-aspect,”reality underlying both mind (nonlocal coherence) and matter (local incoherence). In a similar way, Hameroff views the quantum as the fundamental substrate of both consciousness and material bodies. Other theorists, however—such as David Bohm, on the one hand, and Carl Jung and Wolfgang Pauli, on the other—see quantum phenomena pointing to a reality even deeper than the quantum: a reality rich with underlying causal order that shapes the patterns of mind and of matter, and the patterns that connect them both together. For Bohm, this deeper realm is the “implicate order”; for Jung, it is the domain of unconscious, transpersonal “archetypes.” Bohm’s Implicate Order Standard quantum theory describes the quantum as intrinsically indeterminate, random, uncaused. David Bohm, however, says that below, or behind, the quantum lies an even deeper reality—which he calls the “implicate order.” The implicate order surrounds and interpenetrates the domain of quantum events and “guides” or causes the apparently random quantum processes to unfold as they do. The implicate order is “enfolded” in the explicate, or manifest, reality detectable at the quantum level and at the macroscopic level of everyday experiences. [See D. Bohm, Wholeness and the Implicate Order.] Jung’s Psychoid Archetypes Like Bohm, Carl Jung proposed that below the conscious mind lies the unconscious psyche, and that below causal matter lies the realm of indeterminate quantum events. Deeper still, below both the level of unconscious psyche and quantum events, lies the realm of a-causal archetypes. Jung called it the “unus mundus,” an indivisible continuum of “psychoid” events. (“Psychoid” means of the nature of both psyche and matter.) The archetypes can never be known directly; they can only be inferred from their effects on the conscious psyche (e.g. in dreams via the unconscious) and on material objects (e.g. patterning of physical processes via quantum events). 4. Consciousness and Quantum Idealism Whereas Hameroff and Zohar straddle a shifting line between materialism and double-aspectism—verging on reducing consciousness to quantum physics—Bohm’s position is a form of “neutral monism” (or “holistic monism”), and Jung’s a “neutral pluralism.” For these latter two, consciousness (or some teleological ordering principle) runs deeper than the quantum—nudging them over toward the idealist camp. Goswami’s Consciousness-based Science In contrast, Amit Goswami sits squarely and unambiguously in the idealist camp. Goswami is distinctive as a quantum physicist because he has proposed a radical departure for quantum theory—taking consciousness as the primary, all-encompassing reality. For Goswami, there is no question of “quantum reductionism”—where consciousness is somehow generated by or emerges from quantum processes. On the contrary, quantum events and processes (e.g. superposition of probabilities) are created by consciousness. For Goswami, consciousness generates the “tangled hierarchy” of quantum probabilities by a creative act of self-reflection. According to Goswami, given the necessity of including the causality of consciousness in quantum physics—to account for the collapse of the Schrödinger wave function—Western science has, for the first time, shifted its ground toward the perennial idealist ontology. Now, a true dialogue can open up, not only between the perennial philosophy (which recognizes the reality and primacy of spirit) and quantum physics, but with all the sciences. Whereas other approaches to explaining consciousness in terms of the quantum lead to what Goswami calls “consciousness within science,”his approach explicitly proposes the reverse of this: “science within consciousness.” or “idealist science.” [See A. Goswami, Science Within Consciousness, and The Self-Aware Universe.] Young’s Evolution of Consciousness Another approach to the quantum-consciousness relationship is Arthur Young’s “Theory of Process.” Like Goswami, Young starts with consciousness, or spirit, as the primary reality. But unlike Goswami, Young does not derive the quantum from consciousness. For Young, the quantum is consciousness; spirit is the quantum of action. In Young’s cosmology, the ultimate constituent of reality is the photon (i.e. the quantum of light, or the quantum of action). In other words, Young equates the light of the physicist and the light of the mystic. The physicist’s photon is the mystic’s divine light. Young develops a theory where the photon (or quantum) is inherently purposeful. He points out that the randomness of the quantum is random only from the point of view of the observer. Logically, randomness is indistinguishable from the exercise of choice. Thus, from the point of view of the photon itself, what appears as randomness is actually choice. The photon-quantum, thus, is the source of choice and purpose in the universe. Photon: Strangest Entity in Physics Young also points out that the photon is beyond time and space. It is beyond time because the photon always travels at the speed of light, and at that speed time ceases to exist. It is beyond space because a single photon can traverse the entire universe without losing any energy. In other words, it experiences no distance, or space, between the start to end of its journey. For other reasons, Young says, the photon is the most unusual entity studied by physics. Not only does it transcend time and space, it has no mass. As young describes, it is pure action—creative and purposeful, and completely free in all dimensions. And this, he says, is as good a definition of spirit as science could hope for. Unlike other entities studied in physics, the photon cannot be observed twice. Its observation is its annihilation. Light is peculiar because it is the condition for all other observations. In fact, observation of a photon is light observing itself (which accounts for its annihilation or self-absorption). Young’s Challenge to Standard Physics Young’s cosmology challenges standard physics not by introducing ad hoc spiritual metaphors. He arrives at the equation of “photon = consciousness” by a very straightforward extension of normal physics. He shows that standard physics, based on the parameters of mass, length, and time, has consistently overlooked the fourth parameter of control. Yet the formula for deriving control (and control implies choice) is simply a matter of asking an obvious question: What is the third derivative of position with respect to time? (The first derivative is velocity, the second is acceleration . . . and that’s where physics stops.) By taking the next, clearly logical, step, physics opens up to include control (and therefore choice and therefore consciousness). Theory of Process The central idea in Young’s theory is process—powered and governed by the quantum of action—and this process is evolutionary. Evolution begins with the photon descending through four levels of reality (at each level giving up a degree of its original unconstrained freedom). Beginning at the highest (first) level of pure, unconstrained action (pure spirit) the photon creates the dimension of time and nuclear particles (second level); next it creates the two dimensions of space (width and height) and atoms (third level); and then it combines the three dimensions of time and space (time is equivalent to dimension of depth) to create the world of molecular matter (fourth level). At this point, the photon begins its ascent, regaining degrees of freedom at each level. After matter, comes the level of plants (third level); then animals (second level); ever on upward to its homecoming in spirit. [See A. Young, The Reflexive Universe.] |
|
||