Jack Sarfatti
Unlike the books just mentioned, this book has an original point of view not found in any other popular book exploring the links between science, spirit, meaning, freedom and destiny. The key to the puzzle is quantum physics. The meaning of quantum physics was debated for years by Albert Einstein and Niels Bohr. Bohr basically won the intellectual battle though both had important fragments of the greater truth. David Bohm was the only person who saw deeply into this debate and emerged with a profound synthesis that was not properly considered by the physics community, spell bound by Bohr's mystical notions until relatively recently. Indeed, the mystical nature of most of the current popular books in the "New Physics" should be laid at Bohr's doorstep. John Archibald Wheeler described Bohr's idealistic view of quantum reality with the image of a "Smoky Dragon". Bohm slayed the Dragon.
To see the nature of the problem, we must first go back to the old physics of Isaac Newton in the 17th century which saw the universe as a clockwork mechanism of hard tiny particles moved by the universal lifeless attractive force of gravitation acting instantaneously at a distance. The recognition of additional electric and magnetic forces and their connection to light developed over the next 200 years ending in James Clerk Maxwell's theory of the electromagnetic field with waves that moved at a speed of light of 300,000 kilometers per second in empty space. The basic picture physical reality in the year 1900 was that of particles of matter moved by spread out force fields of gravitation and electromagnetism.
A series of new discoveries at the close of the 19th century forced physicists to develop quantum mechanics. All of our modern electronic computer technology depends upon applications of quantum mechanics. It is a very practical theory of matter and radiation but its deeper meaning is obscure and is hotly debated even now. The new property of matter introduced by quantum mechanics is called the wave function. Niels Bohr asserted that the wave function is a complete picture of reality at the quantum level. In particular, Bohr said that it is impossible, in principle, to try to visualize the motion of particles of matter on definite paths in space the way we do in the old physics which works very well for our automobiles and NASA space craft. Furthermore, Bohr asserted, that this wave function is really something essentially mental because it has to do with our knowledge of the probabilities of our observations rather than with what is actually out there independent of our consciousness. This is an idealistic anti-materialist view which immediately suggests comparison with mystical philosophy as given in Fritjof Capra's, The Tao of Physics, and Gary Zukav's, The Dancing Wu Li Masters. The problem is that Bohr threw the baby out with the bath water. There is no objective matter in Bohr's Smoky Dragon vision of the world. Somehow, and this is called the quantum measurement problem, the illusion of material objects existing independently from us emerges in a very vaguely formulated "classical limit" in which possibility is magically transformed into actuality by the "collapse of the wavefunction".
Einstein did not like this at all. He realized that the only way Bohr's view could be a complete theory of reality was for there to be a violation of one of his basic ideas that the speed of light in empty space was an absolute speed limit. If it was not an absolute speed limit, then his theory of special relativity showed that one could send messages backwards in time and this seemed to be self-evidently nonsensical. However, recent experiments have shown that such faster-than-light quantum effects actually exist. There is a Catch 22, these faster-than-light effects cannot be used to send messages. Basically, the complete randomness of quantum events prevents the receiver from decoding the message until a regular signal from the sender limited by the speed of light arrives. Thus, there is an uneasy truce between Einstein's relativity and Bohr's quantum theory at the present time. On the other hand, it is possible to use these faster-than-light effects practically to encode secure secret messages in such a way that no one can tap into the message without the receiver knowing. This quantum cryptography has immediate application to safe financial transactions on the Internet.
Bohm showed that Einstein was partly right in that Bohr's view was incomplete. One must keep both the particles and force fields of the old physics in addition to the new quantum wave function. Contrary to Bohr, we can picture the motion of particles in space at the quantum level , but there is a new kind of quantum force in addition to the classical forces of electromagnetism, gravity and even the strong and weak forces of modern high energy physics. This new quantum force or "connection" is like The Force in George Lucas's Star Wars. Unlike ordinary forces the quantum force does not get weaker as the distance between quantum-connected particles increases. It is very private in that it connects specific particles. Although the quantum force can be disrupted, it cannot be shielded. Furthermore, the quantum force depends on a wholistic pattern of information that is literally beyond space and time which can be described as "organic" or "mental". Finally, Bohm showed that our modern quantum technology found in our computers can be explained on the basis of an approximation in which the quantum force guides its particles, but its particles do not directly back-react on their own quantum force. In other words, the quantum force is the "unmoved mover" which changes matter but is not changed by matter. Indeed, the quantum force violates Newton's idea that for every action there must be a reaction. This is the key idea of Bohm's theory which cannot even be formulated in Bohr's theory.
Bohm also showed that Einstein was partly wrong because this quantum force does act faster than the speeding photon. However, Bohm was also able to show that it is the absence of direct back-reaction of the particle on its own quantum force that is responsible for the complete randomness of individual quantum events, and this is what prevents us from using the faster-than-light quantum force to send practical messages. This is where matters stood until my new idea was born stimulated by ideas of Henry Pierce Stapp of Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Cambridge University's Nobel Laureate Brian Josephson and his students, Oxford University's Roger Penrose working with Stuart Hameroff, MD, and by the hippy physicist, Nick Herbert of Boulder Creek, California. Josephson , suggested that quantum mechanics is an approximation that applies only to dead matter and not to living matter. He further speculated that living matter is able to use faster-than-light quantum nonlocality in practical ways that are not possible with dead matter. However, Josephson, brain-washed by Bohr like most of us, was not aware of Bohm's idea that quantum mechanics is an approximation in which there is no direct back-reaction of matter on its own wave function. Therefore, Josephson did not have any definite mathematical idea of how to make such a theory of living matter.
Stapp made such a mathematical model of mental phenomena is which free will or "intent" was measured as a controllable distortion of the statistical patterns predicted by "orthodox quantum mechanics". This means that our free will is able to make individual quantum events non-random if Stapp's model, based entirely on Bohr's theory of the Smoky Dragon, was pointing in the right direction.
Penrose stimulated by biological information from Hameroff on microtubules in the cells of our body started to make a quantum theory of mental phenomena. However, Penrose, though a former colleague of the late David Bohm at Birkbeck College, did not use Bohm's theory and was also mesmerized by Bohr. Penrose is still thinking in terms of a modification of Bohr's theory in which there is a new kind of collapse of the wave function depending on quantum gravity which triggers a conscious thought in some vague way.
Nick Herbert published a book, Elemental Mind, which solves the "hard problem" of what is mind, by saying that mind is fundamental. It does not emerge from matter. However, Nick is also under Bohr's spell and does not invoke Bohm's theory.
The gestalt jelled in my mind, that the quantum wave functions of matter are fundamentally mental on an equal footing with matter at the deepest level of physical reality. This only makes sense in Bohm's theory not in Bohr's. In one stroke we understand the detailed mechanism of how mind moves matter. It does so by the quantum force of Bohm's theory. Since the quantum force is wholistic or nonlocal able to extend over large distances without weakening, it also explains the "binding problem" of how it is that we experience a unity of consciousness even though neuroscience tells us that different pieces of our processing of sensory data occur in very different parts of our cortex. In addition, the work of Candace Pert on chemical messenger molecules in our blood show a close connection between our emotional feelings and the efficacy of our immune system. The implications for healing are enormous when we realize that who we are as mental beings is a quantum wavefunction extending over every cell in our body not just in the cells of our brain.
But still there was something missing from the picture. There is no room for free will in either the old classical physics of complete determinism or the new quantum physics of complete randomness. Our free will, as shown by Stapp, must involve a violation of the complete randomness of ordinary quantum physics. Here is where the direct back-reaction of matter on its mind comes in. When mind not only acts on its matter, but its matter also reacts back on its mind, we have a feedback control loop which imposes coherent order on the maximal randomness of the quantum processes of dead matter. This is the measure of life, perception, intent and consciousness already apparent in the intelligent behavior of single cell organisms.
We are now ready to answer Hawking's questions about the Mind of God. It is the wave function of the universe. The wave function of the universe is in superspace that is literally beyond spacetime but it guides the evolution of our expanding universe in cosmic time. If we add the back-reaction of living matter on the wavefunction of the universe then we have a mechanism for communion with God.
This book will develop these ideas in detail.
Chalmers writes:
"Against reductionism I will argue that the tools of neuroscience cannot provide a full account of conscious experience, although they have much to offer. Against mysterianism I will hold that consciousness might be explained by a new kind of theory. ..... For example, it will probably involve new fundamental laws, and the concept of information may play a central role. "The outline of the new theory is David Bohm's version of quantum mechanics with an additional feature of "back-action" that makes it a new theory beyond, but consistent with, quantum mechanics today. David Bohm shows clearly that the world splits in two -- into classical matter and quantum wavefunction. The outer objective world of dead matter revealed by our senses obeys the Newtonian and Maxwellian laws only because the effects of the quantum wavefunction are hidden from direct view. The inner subjective world of our immediate perception, feeling and thinking is intrinsically quantum-mechanical. It is hard to be conscious of consciousness. It is like breathing. We take it for granted. The secret is right in front of us. Indeed, it is us!
Chalmer's writes:
"For this purpose, I find it useful to distinguish between the "easy problems" and the "hard problem" of consciousness. ...The easy problems of consciousness include the following: How can a human subject discriminate sensory stimuli and react to them appropriately? How does the brain integrate information from many different sources and use this information to control behavior? How is it that subjects can verbalize their internal states? Although all these questions are associated with consciousness, they all concern the objective mechanisms of the cognitive system.....The hard problem, in contrast, is the question of how physical processes in the brain give rise to subjective experience. This puzzle involves the inner aspect of thought and perception: the way things feel for the subject. .... . It is these phenomena that pose the real mystery of the mind........Consider the hypothesis put forward by neurobiologists Francis Crick of the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in San Diego and Christof Koch of the California Institute of Technology. They suggest that consciousness may arise from certain oscillations in the cerebral cortex, which become synchronized as neurons fire 40 times per second. .... The hypothesis could conceivably elucidate one of the easy problems about how information is integrated in the brain. But why should synchronized oscillations give rise to a visual experience, no matter how much integration is taking place? This question involves the hard problem,... Some have suggested that to solve the hard problem, we need to bring in new tools of physical explanation: nonlinear dynamics, say, or new discoveries in neuroscience, or quantum mechanics. But these ideas suffer from exactly the same difficulty. Consider a proposal from Stuart R. Hameroff of the University of Arizona and Roger Penrose of the University of Oxford. They hold that consciousness arises from quantum-physical processes taking place in microtubules, which are protein structures inside neurons. It is possible (if not likely) that such a hypothesis will lead to an explanation of how the brain makes decisions or even how it proves mathematical theorems, as Hameroff and Penrose suggest. But even if it does, the theory is silent about how these processes might give rise to conscious experience. ..... Making that leap will demand a new kind of theory.... In searching for an alternative, a key observation is that not all entities in science are explained in terms of more basic entities. .... If the existence of consciousness cannot be derived from physical laws, a theory of physics is not a true theory of everything. So a final theory must contain an additional fundamental component. Toward this end, I propose that conscious experience be considered a fundamental feature, irreducible to anything more basic. The idea may seem strange at first, but consistency seems to demand it. In the 19th century it turned out that electromagnetic phenomena could not be explained in terms of previously known principles. As a consequence, scientists introduced electromagnetic charge as a new fundamental entity and studied the associated fundamental laws. Similar reasoning should apply to consciousness."Good. Now let's see in more detail how Bohm's paradigm accomplishes what Chalmer's is correctly calling for. The old physics is "classical". Bohm's theory impeccably accounts for the existence of the classical limit. The classical limit is simply when the effects of the quantum wave function are small. This may seem trivial, but it is not because in Bohr's "Copenhagen Interpretation" the problem of "the classical limit" is not solvable. Physicists have gone through great mental gymnastics invoking a mystical "collapse" of the wavefunction in which insubstantial possibility is magically transformed into hard-boiled actuality. The main defect in Bohr's approach was that the baby was thrown out with the bath water. Like Gertrude Stein's description of her hometown, Oakland, California, "there ain't no there, there". In our case, there ain't no matter in matter -- in Bohr's theory. Bohr said that the quantum wavefunction is a complete description of reality. Our ordinary ideas of particles moving along definite paths under the action of forces are fundamentally wrong according to Bohr.
Bohm showed that Bohr's renunciation of classical ideas was unnecessarily radical. It is a case of the cure being worse than the disease. One can still use the classical idea of particles moving on definite paths, but there is a new kind of quantum force which is qualitatively different from the classical forces of electromagnetism and gravitation. What are these differences? Let's focus on the electric force between two charges. The force law is very simple. The only variable it depends on is the separation between the charges. The quantum force between two particles is very different. It does depend upon the separation between the particles, but, unlike the electrical force, the quantum force generally does not weaken as the separation increases. What is even, at first sight more astonishing, is that the quantum force also depends upon a pattern of information that lives in what mathematicians call a "Hilbert space" that is literally beyond physical space. Hilbert space is also beyond the "phase spaces" of classical chaos theory. This dramatically new feature is called "context-dependence". Thus, the behavior of matter at the quantum level is not fully determined by the relative positions of the particles and by the classical forces between them.
Bohm's theory completely accounts for all "nonrelativistic" phenomena which includes all biochemical and atomic phenomena. There is a problem of fitting Bohm's theory in with Einstein's special theory of relativity, but similar problems also exist in Bohr's theory -- and progress is being made. However, the problem of the physics of consciousness is definitely nonrelativistic.
Newton's third law is that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. This general idea has been found to be correct in every case in the history of physics except for one. The exception is quantum mechanics. David Bohm proved that in ordinary quantum mechanics the quantum wave function exerts the new kind of context-dependent force on a particle in addition to whatever classical forces act on it, but, surprisingly, there is no reaction-force exerted by the particle back on the quantum wavefunction. Indeed, it is this absence of reaction or back-action that is responsible for the random behavior of large numbers of individual quantum systems.
So here is the new idea. The hypothesis is that the quantum wavefunction is irreducibly "mental". I use the word "mental" and not the word "conscious" quite deliberately. From this point of view, the quantum force is a mental force on matter. One major mystery is immediately solved. We immediately understand how mind moves matter. The context-dependent quantum force is the force of mind on matter. Indeed, the "context" is the "mental state". The detailed action of the force of mind on matter sensitively depends upon the structure of the mental state in Hilbert space. The big problem for my new theory is just the opposite: How does matter influence mind? Bohm's mathematics shows that any conceivable model of such "back-action" influence of matter on mind will seriously distort the randomness of ordinary quantum mechanics. Back-action replaces quantum randomness by quantum order.
But we can see even more interesting consequences from this simple idea that the quantum wavefunction is irreducibly mental. Consciousness demands awareness of changes in the material world. If there is no direct back-action of matter on the mental wavefunction, then the mental wavefunction has no way of sensing the material aspect of reality. Without back-action the mental wavefunction is literally blind, deaf and dumb. The force it exerts on matter has no intelligence, purpose or meaning in individual cases. The only order we see is statistical like the order seen in human behavior by the insurance actuary or the statistical economist.
Therefore, an immediate prediction of my new theory of the physics of consciousness is that all living matter has statistical behavior that strongly contradicts quantum mechanics. Now we need to make something clear here. We are talking about many-particle collective modes of behavior of complex open systems far from thermal equilibrium with their environment. If we probe the single particle modes of living matter we will see ordinary quantum mechanics. The idea is that biological back-action emerges in the collective motion of living matter. This idea is part of the "renormalization group" of modern theoretical physics. As an example, in superstring theory, Einstein's general theory of relativity of the gravitational field emerges as a low energy limit. Similarly, for the Lagrangian field theory of the standard model of elementary particles. The stuff we are talking about is at a much lower energy with the additional constraint that the systems of matter are not in thermal equilibrium. Furthermore, the subjective quantum wavefunction of the objective collective mode must be protected from disruption or "decoherence" by the environment. The collective mode includes the objective pattern of neural firings in the brain as well as the objective flow of chemical messenger molecules in the blood. It is the back-reaction of the objective collective mode on its wavefunction which is responsible for our perceptions, thoughts and feelings. It enables our intent, purpose and free will. Based on the new changing information in the back-action, the quantum wavefunction computes itself into new shapes to intelligently modify the global patterns of neuron firings and neurotransmitter synaptic flows using the quantum electron control switches of the protein dimer conformations on the surface of the microtubules. Hameroff has shown how these electron "Eccles gates" are protected from decoherence. The mind is the quantum wavefunction of the collective modes of these electrons in my theory.
The quantum-connectedness discovered by Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen in 1935 is a crippled thing in ordinary quantum mechanics of lower level modes of matter behavior without back-action. It can explain "synchronicity" as "correlation", but it cannot be used to communicate messages because these messages are not decodable. The emergence of back-action changes the story dramatically. The "nonlocal" quantum-connection then becomes a new kind of communication channel that, in my new theory, is a vital part of the post-modern physics of consciousness.
This article contains copyrighted material that has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. MCF is offering this article available to our readers for the general purpose of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching and/or research. We believe that our use of this material falls under the "fair use" provision of Title 17, Section 107 of the United States Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes other than that provided by law, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
| Back to MFC Index | Back to Hambones Index |
