A philosophy of quantum mechanics question

[Sophrosyne]

TL;DR

A particular "many worlds" interpretation of quantum mechanics, linking it to consciousness, can't be right because you don't necessarily collapse wave functions by looking at them.

There is an interpretation of quantum mechanics out there, and I was not sure if physicists take this seriously, or if it's one of those woo-woo popular misunderstandings of quantum mechanics. So I am posing it to our esteemed physicists here.

It says that there can be all sorts of universes unfolding at any given moment, and it is our consciousness, our observation of it as conscious and sentient beings, that collapses its wave function and unfolds the particular universe we see before us. Our consciousness and observation is what makes the universe unfold before our eyes.

But in thinking about it, I don't see how that can be right. When I look at something, I am not collapsing its wave function necessarily. In looking at a tree, all the electrons going around the nuclei in the tree are still in a cloud of superposition around the nuclei. I may have some rough idea of the probability of where those electrons are, but only with the uncertainty of Heisenberg. I can even tell you that the electrons in, for example, the water molecules, have more of a chance of being toward the side of the oxygen than the hydrogen, and that's why the water is a polar molecule. But I still wouldn't be able to tell you exactly where that electron is, or how fast it's going. I am not collapsing any of those wave functions by looking at it.

Now this is somewhat different than the "many worlds" interpretation offered by Stephen Hawking in his book "The Grand Design"- where he says, using M-theory, that there can be an infinity of possibilities, and we only live in the one where the fine-tuning allowed the emergence of a conscious species like ourselves to sit there and wonder about it. This is not about wave function collapse either, just probabilities. This interpretation just says that everything is possible quantum mechanically, but we only live in the one that led to creatues like us that can ask the question. But we don't make it happen. If we humans or all sentient and conscious life in general was obliterated in such a universe, it would continue to exist and continue to evolve according to the laws of physics.

I know some of this stuff is controversial, and many physicists are of the "shut up and calculate" quantum mechanics school of Richard Feynman. But I was just wondering what any of those with a more philosophical bent thought of all this. It just seems there are too many charlatans and woo-woo mystics out there trying to make quantum mechanics to be something more than it is, and drag in issues of neuroscience and human consciousness into it, to make it just a reliable internet search. I wanted the opinion of the scientists on this.

 

[EPR]

What is the question?

There are many interpretations of quantum mechanics and most of them don't exactly make sense wrt to your preconceived notions.

You cannot rule out an interpretation based on whether you think it makes sense. Most physicists don't need an interpretation to practice physics.

Generally speaking, it's wrong to start qm with the interpretations as you may get the wrong idea or be drawn into someone's agenda.

 

[PeterDonis]

There is an interpretation of quantum mechanics out there

Can you give a specific reference? What you are describing doesn't look like any of the usual interpretations of QM. In any case, we need a reference to know where you are getting your understanding from.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Can you give a specific reference? What you are describing doesn't look like any of the usual interpretations of QM. In any case, we need a reference to know where you are getting your understanding from.

OK, sure. Here is one that tries to link consciousness to quantum mechanics, and wants to work back the other way as well-quantum mechanics to consciousness.

“When this "observer effect" was first noticed by the early pioneers of quantum theory, they were deeply troubled. It seemed to undermine the basic assumption behind all science: that there is an objective world out there, irrespective of us. If the way the world behaves depends on how – or if – we look at it, what can "reality" really mean?Some of those researchers felt forced to conclude that objectivity was an illusion, and that consciousness has to be allowed an active role in quantum theory. To others, that did not make sense. Surely, Albert Einstein once complained, the Moon does not exist only when we look at it!

Today some physicists suspect that, whether or not consciousness influences quantum mechanics, it might in fact arise because of it. They think that quantum theory might be needed to fully understand how the brain works.

Might it be that, just as quantum objects can apparently be in two places at once, so a quantum brain can hold onto two mutually-exclusive ideas at the same time?

These ideas are speculative, and it may turn out that quantum physics has no fundamental role either for or in the workings of the mind. But if nothing else, these possibilities show just how strangely quantum theory forces us to think...”

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20170215-the-strange-link-between-the-human-mind-and-quantum-physics

 

[PeterDonis]

Here is one

This is not a valid reference; it's not a textbook or peer-reviewed paper. This is a topic where one needs to be even more careful about references than in other areas of physics.

I am closing the thread since we have no valid reference to use as a basis for discussion. If you have an actual textbook or peer-reviewed paper, PM me a link and I'll take a look; I can reopen the thread if it's warranted.