Q (Quora): How does the theory of quantum mechanics affect our picture of consciousness?
A (Martin): The two notions (QM and consciousness) are incommensurable in all respects, which should be obvious:
a) QM is a theory referable to reality or an aspect of reality (the microcosm); consciousness, on the other hand, is a known reality, not a theory – not only a fact but that which is behind, the substratum of, all facts and movements of the mind.
b) The reality that is consciousness does not need to be proven for it is immediate, direct, unstultifiable or unsublatable. Everything else – objects or phenomena, thought-constructions, etc. – are stultifiable.
That means that there is not even an approximation between the theory of QM and reality per se. It would be a category mistake to relate one to the other unless using such exercise as analogy or suggestion. In this sense, there are two or three things that can be said:
1) Reality/consciousness is limitless, like the referent (or an aspect thereof) of QM, but the former is un-measurable, unlike QM which is amenable to measurement/quantification and statistical verification
2) Reality is non-local (Bell’s theorem), like QM.
3) Consciousness/reality does not depend on anything, while QM is theory-dependent.
Hi Martin,
The ‘Science of Consciousness Conference’ is in Barcelona this year in July. Deepak Chopra is speaking on ‘Quantum Fields and Consciousness’. Will you be going?
Best wishes,
Dennis
Thank you, Dennis. I am tempted (in principle) to attend at that meeting. However, 1) I depend on a walker to move about due to limited mobility, and 2) I have a reminiscence of Chopra from a few years ago (having read or listened to him on a few occasions) which made me think of him as a dilettante – he, at one point, and to his credit, – agreed with that observation or judgment. M.
For those who may not have thought about this topic before, I asked ChatGPT to summarise the ‘parallels’ between Advaita and Quantum Mechanics. It gave a pretty good answer, I thought:
Great question — this is a topic that has fascinated both philosophers and physicists for over a century now. Let’s break it down from both directions:
1. Why Quantum Mechanics Might Be Valuable for Explaining Advaita:
a. Undermining Naive Realism:
Quantum mechanics (QM) challenges the idea of an independently existing, observer-independent reality — much like Advaita Vedānta, which asserts that the world of multiplicity is māyā (illusory or dependent on consciousness).
In QM:
The observer effect (e.g., in the double-slit experiment) shows that the act of observation collapses a wave function into a particle — suggesting that consciousness or observation “creates” reality.
This resonates with Advaita’s teaching that consciousness (Brahman) is the substratum of all phenomena.
b. Non-locality and Unity:
Entanglement shows that particles can remain connected across space and time, violating classical ideas of separateness.
Advaita similarly teaches that all apparent distinctions are illusory, and in truth, everything is one undivided reality (Brahman).
c. Role of the Observer:
In QM, the observer plays a fundamental role in determining the state of a system.
In Advaita, pure awareness (witness consciousness, sākṣin) is the ultimate reality, not the objects perceived.
d. Wave Function as Potentiality (Māyā):
The wave function contains all possible outcomes, but none actual until measured — this is a powerful parallel to Advaita’s concept of māyā, which is not-real, not-unreal, and represents potential forms that appear real due to ignorance (avidyā).
2. Why Advaita Might Be Valuable for Interpreting Quantum Mechanics:
a. Conceptual Framework for Unity:
Advaita provides a coherent metaphysical framework to interpret the apparent paradoxes of QM:
If all is one, then non-locality, observer-dependence, and entanglement are not paradoxical but expected.
b. Resolving the Measurement Problem:
Where science struggles with the “collapse of the wave function”, Advaita’s idea that the mind projects names and forms upon undifferentiated Brahman offers a conceptual analogue: the collapse is a projection by the knowing mind, not a physical event.
c. Support for Consciousness-First Models:
Some interpretations of QM, like Consciousness-Causes-Collapse or idealism, are easier to embrace within an Advaitic metaphysics, where consciousness is not a product of matter but the basis of all experience.
Caveats and Caution:
Advaita and QM come from entirely different domains — the former is a spiritual-metaphysical inquiry, the latter a scientific-empirical theory.
One should be careful not to conflate metaphor with equivalence. Terms like “observer” or “consciousness” mean different things in physics and Vedānta unless clearly defined.
Summary Analogy:
Think of QM as pulling the rug out from under classical assumptions of a separate, objective world — and Advaita saying: “Yes, and here’s what’s really going on underneath: a non-dual reality that appears as multiplicity.”