[Paper Review] Quantum mechanics, objective reality, and the problem of consciousness

Ranjan Mukhopadhyay|arXiv (Cornell University)|Apr 10, 2018

Quantum Mechanics and Applications27 references3 citations

TL;DR

This paper proposes a unified philosophical framework linking quantum mechanics and consciousness by positing a hidden, nonlocal reality where consciousness is a fundamental component, resolving both the measurement problem in quantum mechanics and the hard problem of consciousness without altering quantum formalism. It argues that subjective experience emerges from this deeper reality, reconciling objective physical laws with conscious observation through a consciousness-inclusive realism.

ABSTRACT

The hard problem in consciousness is the problem of understanding how physical processes in the brain could give rise to subjective conscious experience. In this paper, I suggest that in order to understand the relationship between consciousness and the physical world, we need to probe deeply into the nature of physical reality. This leads us to quantum physics and to a second explanatory gap: that between quantum and classical reality. I will seek a philosophical framework that can address these two gaps simultaneously. Our analysis of quantum mechanics will naturally lead us to the notion of a hidden reality and to the postulate that consciousness is an integral component of this reality. The framework proposed in the paper provides the philosophical underpinnings for a theory of consciousness while satisfactorily resolving the interpretation problem in quantum mechanics without the need to alter its mathematical structure. I also discuss some implications for a scientific theory of consciousness.

Motivation & Objective

• To address the hard problem of consciousness—how subjective experience arises from physical brain processes—by re-evaluating the nature of physical reality.
• To resolve the second explanatory gap in quantum mechanics: the transition from quantum to classical reality, particularly the role of measurement and observation.
• To develop a self-consistent philosophical framework that simultaneously reconciles consciousness and physical reality, challenging physicalism and anti-realism.
• To provide a foundation for a scientific theory of consciousness that treats subjective experience as fundamental, not emergent.
• To reframe the interpretation of quantum mechanics by embedding consciousness as essential to the emergence of empirical reality, without modifying its mathematical structure.

Proposed method

• Adopt a realist stance, assuming an objective, observer-independent physical reality underlying quantum phenomena.
• Introduce a deeper, nonlocal reality that is fundamentally interconnected and proto-conscious, serving as the substrate for both quantum behavior and conscious experience.
• Reinterpret quantum measurement not as a physical collapse but as a process tied to consciousness, where knowledge and observation are intrinsically linked to reality's emergence.
• Use quantum Bayesianism (QBism) as a conceptual tool to emphasize the role of knowledge and agent-based observation in quantum mechanics.
• Frame the wavefunction not as a physical state but as a representation of an agent’s knowledge, aligning with the idea that reality is tied to conscious observation.
• Propose that empirical reality emerges from this underlying proto-conscious reality, with consciousness acting as a bridge between quantum potentiality and classical experience.

Experimental results

Research questions

• RQ1 How can the hard problem of consciousness—why physical processes give rise to subjective qualia—be resolved within a physicalist framework?
• RQ2 What is the role of consciousness in the measurement process of quantum mechanics, and how does it resolve the measurement problem?
• RQ3 Can a unified philosophical framework reconcile the objective reality of physics with the subjective nature of conscious experience?
• RQ4 How does the assumption of a consciousness-inclusive underlying reality resolve the tension between quantum mechanics and classical observation?
• RQ5 What implications does this framework have for the nature of time, particularly the subjective flow of time, and its relation to physical laws?

Key findings

• The paper proposes that consciousness is not an emergent property of complex brains but a fundamental component of a deeper, nonlocal physical reality underlying quantum mechanics.
• The measurement problem in quantum mechanics is resolved not by modifying the formalism, but by recognizing that wavefunction collapse is tied to conscious observation, not physical interaction.
• Empirical reality is not observer-independent but emerges through the interaction of underlying proto-conscious reality with conscious observers, preserving objectivity at the empirical level.
• The framework avoids the pitfalls of physicalism by treating consciousness as fundamental and irreducible, while still allowing causal efficacy of conscious states on physical processes.
• The flow of time, a central feature of subjective experience, is explained as arising from the ongoing generation of empirical reality through conscious observation, making it incompatible with purely physical descriptions.
• The paper provides a philosophical foundation for a scientific theory of consciousness that treats the mind–brain relationship as fundamental and irreducible, akin to the fundamental laws of physics.