3 ms·

Hey everyone! This is similar to work I do in my PhD. Feel free to ask me any questions! (I believe Ralf, the first author of the paper cited in the article, wi

Hey everyone! This is similar to work I do in my PhD. Feel free to ask me any questions! (I believe Ralf, the first author of the paper cited in the article, will likely come to my group for a postdoc)

dsmithatx 8y ago
I wonder, is there any science that making conscious decisions could be related to quantum mechanics? The mechanics of both feel similar to me.
- imh 8y ago
  The connection between consciousness and quantum mechanics is in the same realm as chemtrails and homeopathy.
  - dsmithatx 8y ago
    As were the connections between energy, time, and mass not so long ago.
  - monktastic1 8y ago
    Not quite. The measurement problem only exists because of this recognition that I only experience one outcome. The key word is experience. Contrary to the author's loose writing, Schrodinger's Cat (and environment) is in a superposition before it entangles with me. Decoherence (which is just a name for really complicated entanglement) does not change that; it only makes it hard to demonstrate the superposition. And yet, after I entangle with it, I am no longer free to treat the system as a superposition. If you try to pin down when "I entangle with it," you will notice yourself trying to make precise when "I experience it." Clearly these problems are linked. To quote Ed Witten: > I’m not going to attempt to define consciousness, in a way that’s connected with the fact that I don’t believe it will become part of physics. And that has to do, I think, with the mysteries that bother a lot of people about quantum mechanics and its applications to the universe. > Quantum mechanics kind of has an all-embracing property, that to completely make sense it has to be applied to everything in sight, including ultimately, the observer. But trying to apply quantum mechanics to ourselves makes us extremely uncomfortable. Especially because of our consciousness, which seems to clash with that idea. So we’re left with a disquiet concerning quantum mechanics, and its applications to the universe. And I do not believe that disquiet will go away. If anything, I suspect that it will acquire new dimensions.
- asafira 8y ago
  While I'm sure people have thought a lot about it, I unfortunately don't know much about it =/.
blotter_paper 8y ago
1) Putting aside feasibility with current technology, do you think Schrödinger's cat is as absurd as Schrödinger thought it was? Do you think that cats, or humans, could be placed in a state of quantum coherence? If not, why? 2) I expect some long-winded disclaimer before you answer this, but do you personally find the Everett interpretation of quantum mechanics or the Copenhagen interpretation to be more probable?

dsmithatx 8y ago

I wonder, is there any science that making conscious decisions could be related to quantum mechanics? The mechanics of both feel similar to me.

imh 8y ago
The connection between consciousness and quantum mechanics is in the same realm as chemtrails and homeopathy.
- dsmithatx 8y ago
  As were the connections between energy, time, and mass not so long ago.
- monktastic1 8y ago
  Not quite. The measurement problem only exists because of this recognition that I only experience one outcome. The key word is experience. Contrary to the author's loose writing, Schrodinger's Cat (and environment) is in a superposition before it entangles with me. Decoherence (which is just a name for really complicated entanglement) does not change that; it only makes it hard to demonstrate the superposition. And yet, after I entangle with it, I am no longer free to treat the system as a superposition. If you try to pin down when "I entangle with it," you will notice yourself trying to make precise when "I experience it." Clearly these problems are linked. To quote Ed Witten: > I’m not going to attempt to define consciousness, in a way that’s connected with the fact that I don’t believe it will become part of physics. And that has to do, I think, with the mysteries that bother a lot of people about quantum mechanics and its applications to the universe. > Quantum mechanics kind of has an all-embracing property, that to completely make sense it has to be applied to everything in sight, including ultimately, the observer. But trying to apply quantum mechanics to ourselves makes us extremely uncomfortable. Especially because of our consciousness, which seems to clash with that idea. So we’re left with a disquiet concerning quantum mechanics, and its applications to the universe. And I do not believe that disquiet will go away. If anything, I suspect that it will acquire new dimensions.
asafira 8y ago
While I'm sure people have thought a lot about it, I unfortunately don't know much about it =/.

blotter_paper 8y ago

1) Putting aside feasibility with current technology, do you think Schrödinger's cat is as absurd as Schrödinger thought it was? Do you think that cats, or humans, could be placed in a state of quantum coherence? If not, why? 2) I expect some long-winded disclaimer before you answer this, but do you personally find the Everett interpretation of quantum mechanics or the Copenhagen interpretation to be more probable?