This is a review of a book by two physics teachers entitled “Quantum Enigma: Physics Finds Consciousness”. I argue that understanding quantum mechanics requires understanding the difference between science, metaphysics, and philosophy.
Human beings have the drive to know and understand everything, and there are two research methods that stand side by side as equals: metaphysics and science. Quantum Enigma: Physics Finds Consciousness shows that lack of understanding of metaphysics is an obstacle to understanding science. Metaphysical questions arise from our transcendence, that is, from our ability to become the subject of our own knowledge: What is conscious knowledge of humans versus sensory knowledge of animals? What is a real being? What are mental beings (images, concepts, past, future, dreams)? What is the truth? What is causality? What is free will? What does it mean to understand something? Is the universe intelligible?
Basically the answer to all the above questions is that there is no answer. They are mysteries. We can understand what a human being is because we know everything we do and everything that happens to us, but we cannot define or explain what a human being is. In other words, humans are spirits incarnate. Using the categories of metaphysics, the human soul is spiritual. Assuming or hoping that the universe is intelligible leads to the existence of a transcendent reality called God in Western religions. God is not a free image, like Santa Claus, but a real being, like a dear friend who gets on your nerves from time to time.
In science, there are no mysteries because science has a tremendous track record of success. Only unanswered questions remain. It can be said from metaphysics that there is no record of success. An example of metaphysical wisdom is that knowledge is the opening of being to self-manifestation of being. In metaphysics, whether the universe is intelligible or not is an open question. But in science, it is not. If Johannes Kepler thought for a minute that the universe was not intelligible, he would not have spent 10 years trying to understand why the planets move the way they do. What caused the Big Bang is not a mystery. What is consciousness is a mystery. Calling both questions mysteries indicates that you don’t understand the difference between metaphysics and science.
A quantum puzzle arises from the question why the cobalt-60 isotope decays into nickel-60 with a half-life of 5.27 years. Using the probability waves of quantum mechanics, physicists can calculate the half-lives of isotopes. A particular cobalt-60 atom can decay in 10 minutes or 10 years. There is a 50% chance that it will deteriorate in 5.27 years. This begs the question: What causes a particular cobalt-60 atom to decay the moment it does? With our current state of knowledge, there is no hope of answering this question. This is an enigma or conundrum because we understand a lot about isotopes in quantum mechanics, but not this.
The authors agree with the nonsense that there is a connection between human rationality (consciousness and free will) and quantum mechanics. I think this idea arises from a lack of understanding of the difference between science, metaphysics, and philosophy. Philosophy is a research method that rises above another research method. How scientists should do science is a philosophical question. The scientific method is an answer to this question. The various interpretations of quantum mechanics are part of the philosophy of quantum mechanics because they are attempts to answer questions about quantum mechanics.
One way to gain knowledge and understanding is through analogies. If you put a lion in a cage with a stick, it will roar and try to scratch you. We know by analogy that the lion is angry because that is how we would feel if it were happening to us. There is an analogy used in quantum mechanics to answer the question: What are waves in quantum mechanics?
To answer this philosophical question, consider the decay of cobalt-60. If you look at a cobalt-60 atom for 5.27 years, it can either decompose (D) or remain stable (S). Repeated observations will give you a series of S and D. You get, in other words, a set: (S, S, D, D, D, S, ..). The fraction of times you get S or D gets closer to 1/2 on the limit as the number of elements in the set increases. I’m using set theory because you need set theory to understand an observation analogous to the decay of cobalt-60: flipping a coin in the air with your thumb and forefinger and getting heads (H) or tails (T). With coin tosses, you get the same kind of set that you get when looking at cobalt-60 atoms. The probability of a heads or tails is 1/2 because that is the fraction you get from the set and all possible subsets. In the case of the coin, there are two events (flipping and falling heads or tails), the subtle provision that the calculation is done for all subsets to eliminate the possibility that there is a demon or hidden variable affecting the result, and the fact that we understand why we come up heads (or tails) half the time. In the case of cobalt-60, there is only one event: the disintegration of the atom. These are two different phenomena. Saying, “1/2 is the probability that a cobalt-60 atom will decay in 5.27 years” is an analogy or a philosophical comment. In my opinion, calling waves of quantum mechanics waves of probability is an example of philosophizing.
The basis for thinking that there is a connection between consciousness and quantum mechanics is the double-slit experiment with particles (photons, electrons, or atoms). There is a version of this experiment on YouTube.com (“Double Slit Experiment Water Wave Interference Pattern”). The double slit creates two water waves and a highly visible interference pattern. The same interference pattern occurs with particles. The probability waves of quantum mechanics explain this and it is another triumph of quantum mechanics.
The big difference between the two interference patterns is that you don’t need a screen to see the interference pattern of the water. You do not see any particle interference pattern if there is no screen. But the screen is there because a human being put it there. Therefore, it is the action of humans that created the interference pattern. This is an enigma or conundrum because it raises the question: What happens to the particles after they hit the double slit if there is no screen? In any case, this is the reasoning, as far as I can understand, behind the idea that quantum mechanics involves human consciousness, but classical physics does not.