The Cosmic Quantum Wavefunction - and What About Consciousness?
Time to address the elephant in the room.
[Posts are sequential, to be read/heard in date order - opposite to the order they’re generally displayed in. Paid-for posts have technical content. To see a full list of posts in sequential order, with a brief summary of each, click here .]
Click the arrow below to hear an audio version of this post (22 mins 52 sec).
The Wavefunction
Every quantum scenario has an associated wavefunction, which identifies the various possible ‘measurables’ involved and their associated probabilities. In general that wavefunction is considered to be limited to the various actors - particles, including photons - directly involved in that scenario.
In practice, though, the development of this wavefunction over time, with subsequent measured outcome(s), isn’t defined wholly and solely by those actors which are immediately and obviously part of the action. Just as the behaviour of, for example, a couple on the disco dance floor will necessarily take account of all the other dancers around them, so the behaviour of an ensemble of particles and energies will inevitably be influenced by all the other energy patterns around them - notably the extended energy fields of other material particles.
As we saw in the previous post on Quantum Randomness, this actually extends to every other particle in the universe, since every such particle has an influence extending infinitely in every direction. So, at its fullest extent, the quantum wavefunction for any situation includes every energy construct, every material particle, in the cosmos - varying only in the magnitude and phase-state of each of these influences. In this respect, as noted in that previous post, the outcome of that scenario is totally deterministic - it can only happen in one way, in accordance with the inputs from all those myriad sources (though obviously analytical determination of that outcome cannot possibly be achieved - hence the ‘randomness’ element in every such outcome.)
Collapse of the Wavefunction
Let’s look, then, at so-called ‘collapse of the wavefunction’ in this context. If we take the simple case of a photon from a point source impacting on a screen: on its journey from source to screen the photon will form an expanding wavefront covering an area over which the photon’s time-varying electromagnetic field will have varying amplitude, stronger towards the centre, weaker towards the periphery. On arrival at that screen it will interact with the electromagnetic fields of the particles on the screen - with input also from the cosmic background electromagnetic field (not to be confused with the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation).
Phase relationships between the photon and the time-varying electromagnetic fields forming the particles in the screen (cyclic photons), mediated by that background field and moderated by the amplitude (i.e. strength) of the photon field at any point, will lead unerringly to the photon wave being entrained by one specific particle on the screen and flowing from a linear state into a cyclic state: the photon is absorbed by that one particle in the screen.
This is a wholly deterministic process - though apparently random, due to the complexity of the interrelationships of the multiplicity of time-varying electromagnetic field factors involved.
This process is repeated for every photon in a beam of light, with differing outcomes for each depending on individual phase relationships. The composite result is a bright dot, reducing in brightness from its centre outward. Again, this is not due to nondeterministic randomness, but rather to deterministic interactions between time-varying electromagnetic fields, giving increasing likelihood of photon entrainment at points of higher amplitude in that photon wavefront.
Note that the illusion of ‘collapse’ of the photon wave to a point in each case is a direct consequence of the (mis)perception that each particle of the screen exists only at a point - the illusion of localisation which is an integral part of our spacetime experience. In reality that atom which is absorbing a photon itself has a widespread presence, spanning the whole of the cosmos. So when the outspread wavefront of the photon interacts with that outspread extended waveform of the atom, the whole of that photon wave, over whatever its area, is entrained by the extended waveform of the atom and effectively wraps itself around, becoming part of the cyclic waveform of the atom, and so is not available at any point within any other particle.
Note also that this gives the impression of instantaneous communication, potentially across a vast area of space if the photon has travelled a great distance before being absorbed. In a very real sense this ‘contraction of time’ is intimately bound up with the ‘contraction of space’: the two are twin perceptual limitations resulting from the nature of our existence as space-time beings; it’s pretty well impossible to separate the one from the other.
Note too that this also gives insight into the ‘nonlocal’ interaction between two entangled photons or electrons. Those two entities are tightly coupled within the same dominant element of a single wavefunction and their separation from each other (in space or time) is an illusion brought about by our limited perception of space, time and the perceived (but illusory) boundaries of particles of matter. It follows, then, that the communication across a potentially vast distance in zero time is actually just a shift in energies within a single joint energy construct for which space and time have no real significance.
So where does this leave Young’s 2-slit experiment?
By this stage it should come as no surprise to learn that this scenario is vastly more complex than the simple setup it appears to be from our perceptually-limited space-time perspective. Not only is each photon passing through one or both slits a spatially distributed entity which doesn’t experience the passage of time, the particles of the card surrounding those slits are also distributed entities each with widespread presence which interacts in a distributed manner with those photons - quite apart from the universal background electromagnetic field which ‘loads’ every interaction to some degree in a totally unpredictable manner (due to its complexity, not to any innate absolute randomness).
The late great Nobel Laureate Richard Feynman is said to have declared that that everything there is to be known about quantum mechanics could be gleaned from careful consideration of the 2-slit experiment; it appears that part of that ‘everything’ is that, at the quantum level - as shown by his own remarkable demonstrations - light has a fine contempt for the niceties of time and space as we experience them. It’s very clear that Young’s experiment, and later versions of it, still have much to teach us about the domain beyond spacetime.
So what about Consciousness?
It’ pretty well universally agreed that consciousness is a thing - it exists. It’s what looks out through your eyes, hears with your ears, has a view on your situation and everything around you.
Yes, consciousness definitely exists. What’s not so universally agreed, though, is what consciousness actually is. The prevailing view among the mainstream scientific community - today at least - is that it’s an emergent property of brain: just as once a bunch of atoms evolves far enough life emerges, so when that life evolves sufficiently then consciousness manifests as an emergent feature of that evolved bunch of atoms.
This hasn’t always been the view of leading scientific thought, though. Various top scientists in the past have taken the view that consciousness is a phenomenon quite distinct from the physical realm, even arguably responsible for its very existence. Nobel Laureate Wolfgang Pauli took the firm view that various of his own experiences were examples of some very real non-physical effect unexplainable in terms of conventional science. Many of his colleagues were also only too well aware of what became known as The Pauli Effect. Erwin Schrödinger, architect of the wave equation fundamental to Quantum Mechanics, was even more definitive: “Although I think that life may be the result of an accident, I do not think that of consciousness. Consciousness cannot be accounted for in physical terms. For consciousness is absolutely fundamental. It cannot be accounted for in terms of anything else”. Max Planck, the founding father of quantum physics, went a step further: “I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness”; and: “As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear-headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.”
For a very up-to-date take on the pitfalls of being stuck in the mechanistic mindset, see the highly authoritative 2007 book by Professor Henry Stapp (a leading authority on quantum phenomena since the 1970s) Mindful Universe, hailed by 2003 Nobel Laureate Tony Leggett as “a bold and original attack on the problem of consciousness and free will based on the openings provided by the laws of quantum mechanics”.
Consciousness is far too big a topic to be explored fully in this post; for more on this see the relevant section in my book Atoms of Light and The Relativity Myth. All we’re considering here is its implications for the quantum wavefunction, and likely consequences.
For this we could maybe look to the notable scientist/inventor R. Buckminster Fuller. A very level-headed guy with many patents on geodesic domes and numerous other innovations, a substantial number of honorary doctorates and an entire family of carbon nanoparticles named fullerenes in his honour, he’d seem to have had his feet very firmly on the ground. So what are we to make of the fact that he was a firm believer in telepathy, based on personal experience of the remarkable abilities demonstrated by his multiply-handicapped daughter? How also should we evaluate his observation that “Life is the spirit incarnate in time”? Bucky Fuller was known for his rather stylised use of language – but he always meant exactly what he said.
Let’s now turn to a research study published in 2002 in the journal of the highly prestigious Bioelectromagnetics Society, the most authoritative and respected journal in the world when it comes to interaction between biological systems and electromag-netic field effects. It’s the industry standard for technologies such as wireless telecommunications and powerlines.
Professor Sidney Lang and his research student Simon Baconnier found that every human pineal gland has embedded in its tissue tens of thousands of microscopic crystals – crystals that raise serious questions as to what’s going on in our heads.
[The pineal gland is a small organ pretty much in the centre of our brains, about the size of a pea. Mystics and philosophers, including Descartes, have labelled it ‘the seat of the soul’ and the source of the mind that guides the physical body.]
Baconnier and Lang found these crystals in every one of 20 pineal glands from donors aged 15 to 68, varying from 100 to 300 crystals per cubic millimetre. The researchers declare them ‘nonpathological’ – they’re undoubtedly there for a reason.
More than this, those researchers found strong evidence that these crystals are piezo-electric, that they have the ability to interact with electromagnetic waves, both as input and output. Since these crystals are not pathological (a sign of some disorder, as e.g. gall stones are) it’s fair to assume that evolution has put them there, so they must have some positive benefit. It’s also fair to assume that, since it’s arguably the most significant aspect of their functionality, their electromagnetic capability must be of relevance to this benefit.
So what does that have to say about ‘the seat of the soul’?
At the very least it indicates that there’s something going on in the humble pineal gland that’s not yet recorded in any medical or biological reference text. That something almost certainly involves some form of electromagnetic interaction, in terms of electromagnetic waves being emitted and/or received. This possibility is supported by various other scientific evidence.
We’re left, then, with a conundrum: why would our bodies – every one of them – choose to secrete tens of thousands of microscopic deposits of calcite in a tiny pea-sized organ in our brains? Stranger yet, why would those deposits appear to respond to electromagnetic waves in a way that has absolutely nothing to do with any function that we know of? What exactly is going on here?
And what has this got to do with the Cosmic Quantum Wavefunction?
Consider this as a working hypothesis:
If consciousness is an inherent property of the universe we live in and are part of - in short, if the universe is conscious, as various leading scientific minds have proposed - and if our individual consciousness is part of that cosmic sentience, then it would make sense that each of us would have the ability to interact with that ‘cosmic field of awareness’. This would include mechanisms whereby we could each feed aspects of our own awareness into that cosmic field, as well as receiving information from it at some level. How better than an organ deep in our brain housing an array of sensors far more numerous, more concentrated, than any other part of our body apart from the eye - and these sensors can transmit as well as receive.
This would make each of us a ‘node’ in this cosmic field of consciousness.
It seems wholly possible that, at a level quite removed from our conventional thinking processes, we are feeding into, as well as receiving from, the cosmic energy field that is the universal quantum wavefunction. In this way our thoughts, and our deepest beliefs, could be contributing to that energy matrix which ultimately tips the balance in those so-called ‘random’ outcomes of quantum events.
[Note that we may also receive signals from that meta-consciousness in other forms, such as in our gut or our heart; that’s a whole nother story.]
In other words, as we’re so often told by spiritual teachers and mystics, our thoughts and beliefs play a real part in shaping our physical experience, through those quantum outcomes. If the universe is indeed some immeasurably vast self-aware entity, it would have no difficulty factoring in those individual inputs to guide outcomes for individuals, groups, nations - totally in keeping with our deepest beliefs.
Herein is a key element of what we term freewill: we determine the direction of events in our lives, not by what we want or wish for, but by that which we believe in the innermost core of our being to be the case. If we truly believe something to be so, be it good or bad, then universal consciousness will honour that perception by fine adjustments to quantum outcomes which create an experience in tune with our beliefs. This is where Quantum Mechanics meets spiritual principles; it’s all totally logical, totally in keeping with observations both in science and in metaphysics. We have the freedom to believe what we choose to believe, and those choices will influence our life experience.
As physical bodies guided by sparks of consciousness, we clearly have freewill to choose our actions moment by moment. We’d do well, though, to note that in all probability we could also be, moment by moment, broadcasting our innermost expectations of the outcomes of those actions into the cosmos, to merge with (and so become part of) the cosmic quantum wavefunction. Should we be broadcasting fear or confidence, resentment or love, doubt or trust? We have a choice. Some 2000 years ago a wise teacher said, on various occasions in various ways: "As you believe, so shall it be done unto you”. Could it be he knew what he was talking about?
We’re told to “Be careful what you wish for”. Maybe we should add: “Be thoughtful about what you choose to believe”.
Next up
Next up is The Relativity-must-be-wrong Fallacy: Let the critic beware their own limited understanding.
In the meantime, be sure to check out Transfinite Mind for a wealth of free resources, including non-technical articles and presentations, as well as books to suit every level of scientific (or non-scientific) background.
Also, if you find these articles interesting and thought-provoking, and you know others who may find them of interest, please be sure to point those others in this direction. Thanks.
Be with you again soon!