QM and mental states,sure this isn’t philosophical discussion

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Adrian Lee
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Discussion Qm
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between quantum mechanics (QM) and mental states, exploring whether and how mental states should be incorporated into quantum physics. It touches on theoretical implications, interpretations of QM, and the measurement problem, while also referencing various philosophical perspectives and literature on the subject.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants reference figures like Von Neumann and Wigner, who propose a connection between QM and mental states, suggesting that this relationship is acknowledged within the community.
  • Decoherence is discussed as a method that attempts to eliminate consciousness from QM discussions, but some argue it does not adequately address the measurement problem or explain the perception of a single state.
  • Participants note that Zurek recognizes a fundamental issue regarding the perception of one state, implying that a comprehensive mind-body model is necessary for resolution.
  • There is mention of numerous papers and discussions among quantum researchers and philosophers advocating for the inclusion of mental states in quantum physics, indicating ongoing scholarly interest in this intersection.
  • One participant cites Bernard d'Espagnat's view that the existence of objects independent of human consciousness conflicts with quantum mechanics, highlighting philosophical implications.
  • Concerns are raised about the relevance of certain literature, with some participants questioning the credibility of works associated with figures like Deepak Chopra.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity and validity of incorporating mental states into quantum mechanics. While some acknowledge the ongoing debate and the existence of unresolved issues, there is no consensus on how to approach these topics or the implications of various interpretations.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the lack of consensus on the interpretation of decoherence, the measurement problem, and the philosophical implications of QM regarding consciousness. The discussion also reflects a division between scientific inquiry and philosophical speculation.

Adrian Lee
Messages
35
Reaction score
10
Various people like VN,Wigner thinks QM links to mental states,we know that.
People introduced decoherence to kick consciousness out of the realm,as we widely accept.But even Zurek himself admits that there is a fundamental problem of why we only perceive one state and that solving the problem needs a full mind-body model.(which is why there’s many minds.)
Tons of quantum researchers and philosophers writes papers published on journals showing that quantum physics must include mental states.And discussions on mind-body relationships in different interpretations as well.
Some people admits that there is some problem going on here, but it does not stop physics from developing because it is currently not falsifiable.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Decoherence does not solve the measurement problem, nor does it create classical probabilities from quantum ones. See, for eg 'Quantum Enigma'. Decoherence is the entanglement of the macroscopic apparatus with the environment, which, in principle, is quantum mechanical in nature. We all know that when two quantum systems meet, they become entangled. Nothing about wave function collapse occurs. plane @ simple

"The doctrine that the world is made up of objects whose existence is independent of human consciousness turns out to be in conflict with quantum mechanics and with facts established by experiment." - Bernard d'Espagnat (a view which he held until his death)
 
Adrian Lee said:
Various people like VN,Wigner thinks QM links to mental states,we know that.
People introduced decoherence to kick consciousness out of the realm,as we widely accept.But even Zurek himself admits that there is a fundamental problem of why we only perceive one state and that solving the problem needs a full mind-body model.(which is why there’s many minds.)
Tons of quantum researchers and philosophers writes papers published on journals showing that quantum physics must include mental states.And discussions on mind-body relationships in different interpretations as well.
Some people admits that there is some problem going on here, but it does not stop physics from developing because it is currently not falsifiable.
The thread is for discussing the necessity ,without personal perspective,of including mind-body discussions into QM .
For instance see https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-019-02101-3
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: StevieTNZ
The fact that this is the QM interpretations forum does not mean we can discuss pop science references. Nor does it mean we can discuss philosophy or metaphysics. @Adrian Lee, if you have a question about QM interpretations, you can post it in a new thread. If you have a question about some interpretation that postulates that "QM links to mental states", and you can find a valid reference discussing it, you can post that in a new thread.

This thread is closed.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
6K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K