QC 4 QuantumBrain

Abstract

In the following discussion I address the role of quantum mechanics with regards to a deterministic universe set in the context of free will. The constraints placed on us by our current understanding of the universe set out the limits of what we can know about free will and indeed any other aspect of nature of this kind. These arguments are used as a basis for my own direction in pursuit of a truer understanding of the universe.

Reality and measurement

It seems that there can be a lack of distinction between the nature of measurement or observation and the nature of what is real (reality), amongst scientists and philosophers alike.

Our understanding of the universe is largely based on the construct of quantum mechanics and since its conception has revealed many surprising aspects about the laws of nature, but non as important to us as Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. Briefly put, HUP states that so called conjugate variables of a quantum system cannot be know simultaneously e.g. the momentum and position of an electron. By considering the universe  as a collection of quantum mechanical systems, which we believe it to be, the HUP can be expanded to encompass all aspects of nature. There is nothing surprising about this. The universe is in a sense unknown to us, we can predict its behaviour with some probablility, but can never determine exactly how things will pan out. However, this is not to suggest that the universe itself plays out in a random fashion. The key to understanding this point is to grasp the meaning of what reality is, and how it may be different in its nature to the restrictions of measurement.

Quantum mechanics can be fun.

What we measure is of course different to reality, we know this to be a consequence of HUP, but this is not the point of the discussion. Because measurements of reality are limited by HUP, and turn out to be probabilistic, does not necessarily mean reality itself is probabilistic. It is important to draw the line between the nature of observation and that of reality

The HUP is a limitation on measurement and therefore we cannot claim that reality is indeed probabilistic. This distinction forms the premise of this argument.

What is reality?

The laws that govern our universe restrict the information we can obtain from any system and so we can only predict with uncertainty in any ‘billiard ball’ model how it will evolve. Reality could be different however, it can never be deterministic in the sense that we could predict it, but it may be internally deterministic. By this is meant that nature herself could ‘know’ precisely what reality is. This in turn destroys the notion of free will. On the other hand, nature may not know what reality is, and reality itself may be subject to constraints similar (or perhaps identical) to those of measurement (HUP).

Are we free?

This question has been of great interest to many great philosophers throughout history. There is a huge desire as an intelligent species to provide a solid answer to this conundrum. But how could we ever know if the universe affords us free will? Unfortunately with our current understanding of the universe, and in particular that of quantum mechanics, we can not know anything of this sort, and so in philosophy it shall remain.

Remarking on our understanding

Quantum mechanics undermines determinism, however, it is not an argument for free will. Since free will, if we believe it to exist, must form part of reality which we can never know with complete certainty.

Scientific direction

What has been said up to now is completely factual and is based on our current understanding of the universe. My own opinion is the following. I believe free will does exist, it is something I can only believe in, I suppose it is a faith. Quantum mechanics (along with evolution) is one of the most proven scientific theories in existence and for this reason I believe also in the HUP. So I have three options, either to accept reality to be internally deterministic, indeterministic or that it has some other nature I have not explored yet. Any way, if I knew which one it was, I would form an argument in favour of my belief in free will. Being as I have no choice but to remain ignorant of reality, I see no point in forming arguments of this kind.

This way

It is my view that questions concerning free will, the existence of god and our very own conscious existence (cogito ergo sum) can be futile endeavours if not tackled from the correct angles. In particular, the quest for a better understanding of consciousness. Although philosophy can be a rewarding and worthwhile exercise, I believe it will fall short in providing a true understanding of consciousness. One flaw with using philosophically grounded arguments for proofs concerning consciousness is that it uses consciousness to unravel the very mystery of consciousness (Prof. Robert Winston). Perhaps for this reason it is bounded by limitations we are unable to address as possibly conscious beings. I believe this aspect of human endeavour will be fruitful if explored in a scientific context based on theory and experiment. We may never arrive at a full understanding, but it may bring us a little closer.

Matthew Broome 21^st October 2008

Links

Chris Crawford - Free Will & Determinism

Christian Neuroscience Society - Quantum Mechanics & Free Will

After watching this following video I realised that in order for me to continue on my quest to better understand the Universe in terms of consciousness, I must be prepared to shift my perspective on science from time to time.

“…there is more to the world than what we are perceiving…”

This video may be a ‘pop-video’, it may be completely factual, however, what we are dealing with here is an area of scientific endeavor almost no one knows anything about. And for that reason alone I must prepare myself for a bumpy ride through a jungle of new ideas.

“We know nothing about reality…”

This quote taken from the video made me smile. Although we are delving into an area of science that is relatively new, this statement alone sums up the efforts of countless philosophers and all-round great thinkers from Goethe to Rene to Plato. Even though sometimes we may feel we understand the world around us, the fact is we see it through the eye of our mind, which of course could distort reality “The brain processes 400bn bits of information a second, but we are only aware of 2000 of them…”.

“…pure abstraction, and that’s what the unified field is, it’s pure abstract potential, pure abstract being, pure abstract self aware consciousness…”

Are they seriously suggesting that the unified field is an abstraction of consciousness? (Oops, I must remember to tame my interior think box). Yes they are. Some of the people in this video are academics and therefore hold these views with a certain level of authority. But should we trust them?

“…somehow intention is related to the output of random number generators…”

Which brings me to a big question, and one I shall return to at a later date. How should we go about our quest to better understand the Universe in terms of consciousness?

“Most people don’t affect reality in a consistent substantial way because they don’t believe they can”

Is this magic?

This last quote confused me, make of it what you will.

“Don’t make the mistake of thinking that the scientific community is scientific…”