Does MWI Adequately Address the Hard Problem of Consciousness?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Blue Scallop
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Hard Mwi
Blue Scallop
Messages
290
Reaction score
17
Did you notice MWI assumes the brain is classical and when we watched the double slit, "that observer will "split" as well--one version of him for each way the double slit experiment came out."

MWI assumes the so called easy problems only. Before I proceed. Please read short paragraph of :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness

"The hard problem of consciousness is the problem of explaining how and why we have qualia or phenomenal experiences—how sensations acquire characteristics, such as colors and tastes.[1] David Chalmers, who introduced the term "hard problem" of consciousness,[2] contrasts this with the "easy problems" of explaining the ability to discriminate, integrate information, report mental states, focus attention, etc. Easy problems are easy because all that is required for their solution is to specify a mechanism that can perform the function. That is, their proposed solutions, regardless of how complex or poorly understood they may be, can be entirely consistent with the modern materialistic conception of natural phenomena. Chalmers claims that the problem of experience is distinct from this set, and he argues that the problem of experience will "persist even when the performance of all the relevant functions is explained".[3]"

Here is a logical question.

If the Hard Problem will involve a new field.. like the conscious field. In MWI, will your brain and the conscious field split as well when you watch the double slit experiment? Or will it turn MWI into say Consistent Histories where the conscious field guide the histories?

All right. I need papers or references regarding this. I didn't start this thread for us to speculate which is against forums rule. I mentioned all this just to ask what physicists have discussed this and what they say. It's important as MWI assume the Soft Problem. You need to take into account the Hard Problem too.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Blue Scallop said:
Did you notice MWI assumes the brain is classical and when we watched the double slit, "that observer will "split" as well--one version of him for each way the double slit experiment came out."
This thread has been closed.

Can you provide any sort of serious (peer-reviewed or mainstream textbook) support for that statement about MWI?
If you or someone else can, PM me or any other mentor with the reference, and we can reopen the thread. But until then the thread is closed, as it is not at all clear that it is based on a solid premise.
 
I would like to know the validity of the following criticism of one of Zeilinger's latest papers https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2507.07756 "violation of bell inequality with unentangled photons" The review is by Francis Villatoro, in Spanish, https://francis.naukas.com/2025/07/26/sin-entrelazamiento-no-se-pueden-incumplir-las-desigualdades-de-bell/ I will translate and summarize the criticism as follows: -It is true that a Bell inequality is violated, but not a CHSH inequality. The...
I understand that the world of interpretations of quantum mechanics is very complex, as experimental data hasn't completely falsified the main deterministic interpretations (such as Everett), vs non-deterministc ones, however, I read in online sources that Objective Collapse theories are being increasingly challenged. Does this mean that deterministic interpretations are more likely to be true? I always understood that the "collapse" or "measurement problem" was how we phrased the fact that...
This is not, strictly speaking, a discussion of interpretations per se. We often see discussions based on QM as it was understood during the early days and the famous Einstein-Bohr debates. The problem with this is that things in QM have advanced tremendously since then, and the 'weirdness' that puzzles those attempting to understand QM has changed. I recently came across a synopsis of these advances, allowing those interested in interpretational issues to understand the modern view...
Back
Top