From: mk_thisisit
The relationship between quantum physics and consciousness presents some of the most profound and intriguing questions in modern science [00:09:39]. Researchers are pushing the boundaries of quantum theory to understand how fundamental principles, such as randomness at the particle level, give rise to the ordered, macroscopic world we perceive, and ultimately, to consciousness itself [00:09:39].
The Observer Effect and Human Consciousness
One area of discussion in quantum mechanics is the “observer effect,” which raises questions about the role of an observer in influencing experimental outcomes [02:39:27].
The Physicist’s Perspective
From the perspective of an experimental physicist, human consciousness, as currently understood in natural sciences, has “absolutely no significance” on the results of an experiment [02:07:05], [02:27:17]. If an experiment is set up with only detectors and computers, the presence or absence of a conscious observer does not change the outcome [02:27:20], [02:27:30].
However, for an observer to “see” something, photons are required, and these photons can indeed disturb the measurement [02:37:35], [02:47:39]. The role of an observer in quantum physics is linked to the transition from the quantum to the classical limit [02:57:54]. The observer, whether an automaton or a conscious being, “intersects the path of possibilities” for further quantum interference, causing a probabilistic outcome (e.g., a photon hitting one detector or another) to become realized [02:58:01], [02:58:08], [02:58:22].
Quantum to Classical Transition
One of the most interesting issues in modern physics is how the transition occurs from the probabilistic, superposition-rich quantum world to the deterministic classical world [00:09:42], [00:09:45]. This phenomenon is addressed by the theory of decoherence, a field of study that explains how quantum systems lose their quantum properties and begin to behave classically when they interact with their environment [00:09:54], [00:10:04], [00:12:03].
The Nature of Consciousness
The emergence of consciousness from physical processes remains a profound mystery [04:22:42]. The “subjective observer” who wakes up in the morning and realizes their existence is an “amazing” and “incredible” phenomenon that cannot yet be explained by current scientific understanding [04:42:49], [04:43:13], [04:43:16]. While we understand how ordinary and even quantum computers work, there is “absolutely no idea” how consciousness arises from the logical actions of neural networks [04:43:21], [04:43:30], [04:43:38].
Quantum Effects in the Brain?
Some theories, like those proposed by Professor Roger Penrose, suggest that quantum effects at the level of microtubules in the human brain might be involved in consciousness [04:43:42], [04:43:45], [04:43:49]. However, this is still seen as a “mechanistic description” that uses quantum language rather than classical, but does not fundamentally solve the problem of subjective experience [04:43:52], [04:43:53], [04:43:56].
The idea of consciousness operating at the level of elementary particles that react on a macro scale, potentially leading to telepathic influence between brains, is a “not very romantic” concept [04:44:35], [04:45:00]. From a scientific standpoint, the standard model, which provides a physical, mechanistic description of reality, is a “necessary condition for consciousness to exist,” but it is unknown if it is “sufficient” [04:45:03], [04:45:06], [04:45:12], [04:45:17].
Cognitive Accessibility and Limitations
A key question is whether all problems, including the nature of consciousness, are “cognitively accessible” to humanity [04:29:30], [04:29:33]. Human understanding is correlated with three-dimensional reality and the perception of time, which sets a certain perspective [04:29:12], [04:29:15]. While humans have a great ability for abstract thinking, the question of whether our brains, with their inherent limitations, can fully comprehend consciousness might be “poorly posed” [04:28:47], [04:28:54], [04:29:35].
It is possible that a part of nature is “not cognitively accessible” to humans [04:50:50], [04:52:52]. However, scientists are committed to conducting cognition based on “well-posed questions” that can be confronted with reality [04:44:10], [04:51:53], [04:51:56]. Questions that cannot be tested against reality are considered “wrongly posed” because there is no mechanism to decide the sensibility of any answer [04:54:57], [04:55:01], [04:55:03], [04:56:07].
Open Questions
The most fundamental question in physics, if a scientist could choose only one, would be “whether and if so how consciousness results from the standard model” [04:42:32], [04:42:37]. This highlights the ongoing scientific quest to understand the underlying principles that give rise to our subjective experience [04:42:46].