Download PRE

Schrödinger's Cat: Research on the Radical Subjective
Solution of the Measurement Problem.
Dick Bierman & Stephen Whitmarsh,
University of Amsterdam
Presented at QuantumMind, Salzburg, July 15-21, 2007
Projection Postulate
Quantum Physics
Potentialities
Classical Physics
Reality
Projection Postulate
Quantum Physics
Potentialities
Collapse of wave function
by what is commonly called a
“measurement”.
Classical Physics
Reality
Measurement problem
If the measurement is affecting the ‘measured’
it is extremely important to precisely define what
constitutes a measurement
Measurement problem
Definition 1:
A measurement is something that you do with a
measurement device….
Usable in the daily practice of physics,
but incorrect: a problem!
(von Neumann)
Possible solutions

Many World solution (Everett)

Deterministic solution (Bohm)

Objective Reduction (Penrose)

Radical subjective solution (Wigner, Stapp)
Radical Solution
…. The reduction of the state vector is a physical event
which occurs only when there is an interaction
between the physical measuring apparatus and the
psyche of some observer…..
Hall, J., Kim, C., McElroy, and Shimony, A. (1977).
Wave-packet reduction as a medium of communication.
Foundations of Physics 7 (1977), 759-767.
Experimental Setup Hall, 1977
Experimental Setup Hall, 1977
Decay
Experimental Setup Hall, 1977
50% of cases
pre-observation
Experimental Setup Hall, 1977
1 µs delay
Experimental Setup Hall, 1977
(final)
observation
Assumptions
1. Consciousness of first observer collapses the
state before second observation.
2. Final Observer (brain) is sensitive for the
difference between collapsed and noncollapsed state
3. Final Observer can report this verbally
(consciously)
Weaknesses in Hall, 1977

Assumption 1 is violated: Delay between first and
second observation too short (e.g. Libet, 1979).

Assumption 3 is inconsistent: The dependent
variable is a conscious verbal report, too late!

Libet et al. (1979): Subjective Referral of the Timing for a
Conscious Sensory Experience. Brain 102, 193-224.
Improvements in replication

Hall et al. 1977

Amsterdam 2003

Delay 1 µs

Delay 1000 ms

Dependent variable: verbal
report

Dependent variable: brain
signals
First Amsterdam setup
PRE-OBSERVER
OBSERVER
First Amsterdam setup
EEG
measurement
Deadtime
2000ms
Delay
1000ms
Geiger
Counter
50%
Radioactive source
PRE-OBSERVER
OBSERVER
Analysis procedure
EEG trace
Preobserved beeps
NOT preobserved beeps
OBSERVER
Analysis procedure
EEG trace
ERP
allfc ParentOther
[ µV]
-5
0
5
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700[ ms]
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700[ ms]
allp ParentOther
[ µV]
-5
0
5
-200
Average EEG from onset-time of event (beep)
-100
Results first Amsterdam Setup
Peak
FC-leads
P-leads
N20
P40
N100
P200
N300
P350
N400
P100
N160
N200
Difference
(microvo lts)
1.002
0.903
0.350
-0.09
-0.04
-0.54
0.098
-0.16
-0.152
-0.956
df = 29
t
2.12
2.64
0.66
-0.18
-0.08
-1.17
0.25
-0.67
-0.84
-3.93
p
0.043
0.013
0.52
0.86
0.93
0.25
0.80
0.50
0.41
0.0005
Non-parm p
N=30
19-11: 0.20
22-8: 0.016
15-15
15-15
15-15
12-18: 0.36
16-14: 0.86
12-18: 0.36
13-17: 0.58
7-23: 0.005
Bierman, D.J. (2003).
Does Consciousness Collapse the Wave-Packet?
Mind and Matter 1(1), pp. 45-57
Conclusions study 1

Radical Subjective Reduction supported


Copenhagen interpretation supported


A quantum-measurement is only complete when ‘acted’ upon by
consciousness.
The collapse of the wave packet occurs with measurement,
creating reality from potentiality.
But wait!

Strong claims need strong evidence, so a second study was
performed
Alternative explanations



Sensory Cueing (ultra sounds)
EM radiation
Chance
Improvements in replication
Amsterdam 2003



Audio Speakers
16 EEG electrodes
Quantum source of
measurement
Amsterdam 2004



Air-pressure headphones
32 EEG electrodes
Quantum & Classical
source of measurement
Analysis procedure
So now we’ve got 4 different conditions:
No pre-observer Pre-observer
Quantum
ERP
ERP
Classic
ERP
ERP
Hypothesis


Effects of pre-observation in pre-conscious timeinterval (0 - ±350 ms) – replication of 2003
experiment
No effects of pre-observation when source is
Classic – the state-vector should already be
collapsed
Second Amsterdam setup
EEG
measurement
Deadtime
2000ms
Geiger
Counter
Delay
1000ms
50%
Timed
Delay
OBSERVER
PRE-OBSERVER
Second Amsterdam setup
EEG
measurement
Deadtime
2000ms
Geiger
Counter
Delay
1000ms
50%
Timed
Delay
OBSERVER
PRE-OBSERVER
Results
Bierman, D. J., Whitmarsh, S. (2006),
Consciousness and Quantum Physics: Empirical Research on the Subjective Reduction of the State Vector.
(Book Chapter) The Emerging Physics of Consciousness, The Frontiers Collection. Tuszynski, J. A. (Ed.).
Results
Results
1.
2.
No effects of pre-observation when source is
Classic
No effects found of pre-observation (thus no direct
replication of 2003 study)
No pre-observer
Pre-observer
Quantum
ERP
ERP
Classic
ERP
ERP
Discussion (no effects of pre-observation)

Uncertainty about the stimulus-origin was
introduced by the addition of a classical source:


Conscious observation of the stimuli did not yield a
definite measurement because it remained unknown
what was actually measured (a quantum or a classic
event)
So Subjective Collapse by the pre-observer was
actually prevented!
Discussion (effect of quantum/singular source)



A different state of event stimuli was still
introduced (quantum/classical)
Since the pre-observer could not collapse the
quantum state, the effect should still be seen on
the final-observer’s EEG…
That’s what we found!
Exploration Quantum/Classic
Exploration Quantum/Classic
Results
1.
2.
3.
No effects of pre-observation when source was
Classic
No effects found of pre-observation (thus no direct
replication of 2003 study)
Effect of event-origin (quantum/classic) in finalobserver’s brain signals!
No pre-observer
Pre-observer
Quantum
ERP
ERP
Classic
ERP
ERP
Alternative explanations




Sensory Cueing (ultra sounds)
EM radiation
Chance
Differences in ISI / decay-time distribution

Shorter intervals with quantum vs. classical events
post-hoc.
Conclusion


Although no direct replication of the 2003
findings,
The second Amsterdam setup is still consistent
with the subjective reduction solution of the
measurement problem
But wait… lets try to reconcile the two… (effect
of pre-observer & classic source)
Reconciliation in third A’dam setup
Q
?
C
!
C
Q
PRE-OBSERVER
PRE-OBSERVER
Sensitivities
Care was taken to maintain exactly the same time-distributions
of the quantum and classical events.
200
180
160
140
120
frequency

100
Quantum Delay
Classic Delay
80
60
40
20
0
7000
-20
8000
9000
10000
11000
12000
13000
time in tenths of milliseconds
14000
15000
16000
Preliminary Results

Analysis done over only a fraction of intended
number of subjects (20 out of 64).
Conclusion



The support for the idea that ‘consciousness
collapses the wave function’ has evaporated.
Initial results due to differences in decay-time
distribution?
However, it could be that the assumptions
underlying this approach are invalid

Consciousness may be not just observing, but measuring
We will find out!
Thank you for your attention.
Shape of difference waves