Quantum Monism Could Save the Soul of Physics

Quantum Monism Could Save the Soul of Physics

Heinrich Päs

Both quantum monism and Everett’s many worlds are predictions of quantum mechanics taken seriously. What distinguishes these views is only the perspective: What looks like "many worlds" from the perspective of a local observer is indeed a single, unique universe from a global perspective (such as that of someone who would be able to look from outside onto the entire universe).

In other words: many worlds is how quantum monism looks like for an observer who has only limited information about the universe. In fact, Everett’s original motivation was to develop a quantum description of the entire universe in terms of a "universal wave function.” It is as if you look out through a muntin window: Nature looks divided into separate pieces but this is an artifact of your perspective.

Both monism and many worlds can be avoided, but only when one either changes the formalism of quantum mechanics—typically in ways that are in conflict with Einstein’s theory of special relativity—or if one understands quantum mechanics not as a theory about nature but as a theory about knowledge: a humanities concept rather than science.

Re: the last sentence, it seems to me any theory we have about Nature is ultimately a theory about our knowledge of Nature?


To quote Bohr:

“In our description of nature the purpose is not to disclose the real essence of the phenomena but only to track down, so far as it is possible, relations between the manifold aspects of our experience." 

“Physics is to be regarded not so much as the study of something a priori given, but rather as the development of methods for ordering and surveying human experience.”

Quantum Monism Could Save the Soul of Physics

Heinrich Päs

All is One

Heinrich Päs is professor of theoretical physics at TU Dortmund University in Germany. He is the author of The Perfect Wave: With Neutrinos at the Boundary of Space and Time (2014) and The One: How an Ancient Idea Holds the Future of Physics (2023).

The ancient philosophy of monism and the physics of quantum entanglement agree: all that exists is one unified whole

...In fact, though philosophers have been proposing monism for thousands of years, and QM is, after all, an experimental science, Western culture has regularly lashed out against the concept and punished those promoting the idea.

It was not always that way. In ancient times, the concept of monism held more weight in the popular mind. Philosophers in the school of Pythagoras (c570-490 BCE), renowned for his alleged discovery of the geometrical relation among the three sides of a right triangle, identified the number one as the centre of the Universe. Heraclitus’ contemporary Parmenides (c520-460 BCE) believed in reality as a timeless ‘one, that is and that is not not to be’. And Plato, arguably the most influential philosopher ever, is said to have taught monism as a secret doctrine at his academy, to be disseminated only orally. Indeed, monism later evolved into a trademark of his school, and Neoplatonists such as Plotinus (c205-270 CE) wrote about ‘the one’ that is ‘all things’ and ‘being’s generator’. Around the same time, mystery cults popular in late antiquity advocated a hidden unity behind the many gods of the Greco-Roman polytheistic pantheon, and understood the different deities as representations of the various facets of a single, unified reality.

Monism has resurfaced again and again by inspiring humanity’s greatest creations and creators across the arts. Mozart’s opera The Magic Flute (1791) included a eulogy of Isis. Beethoven kept the quote ‘I am all that is, that has been and will be, and no mortal has ever lifted my veil,’ attributed to Isis, in a frame on his desk. The Romantic poets from Goethe to Coleridge to Wordsworth describe the longing for a reconciliation of ego and the world within nature.

The 3,000-year-old concept of monism may actually help modern physicists in their struggle to find a theory of quantum gravity and make sense out of black holes, the Higgs boson, and the early Universe. Chances are high that we witness the beginning of a new era where science is informed by monism and the Universe is perceived as a unified whole.

This is all well and seemingly good, but I am still troubled by an extensive old thread, never fully concluded, on the apparent observable fact that dualism seems to be the best model for the paranormal survival after death data:

https://psiencequest.net/forums/thread-d...death-data

"Nobody has addressed my point about the relative simplicity of explaining via dualism much of the paranormal empirical data, including veridical NDE out of body experiences, and past life memories of inhabiting different bodies, coming in to different bodies, etc., all as an immaterial mobile center of consciousness distinct from the physical. All these examples being considerably more simply explained just assuming two fundamentally different kinds of basic substances - physical and spiritual. Again, the actual data and evidence trumps theory, it seems to me."

This was a long thread, and I still have a problem with monism because of this reasoning, despite various fairly good arguments against it related to the notion that this apparent dualism must be just a surface appearance (albeit very convincing) at our level of physical existence. 

From the quantum monism article by Pas, 

"...the physicist and philosopher Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker (speculated that) taking quantum mechanics seriously predicts a unique, single quantum reality underlying the multiverse. The homogeneity and the tiny temperature fluctuations of the cosmic microwave background, which indicate that our observable universe can be traced back to a single quantum state, usually identified with the quantum field that fuels primordial inflation, support this view. 

Moreover, this conclusion extends to other multiverse concepts such as different laws of physics in the various valleys of the “string theory landscape” or other “baby universes” popping up in eternal cosmological inflation. Since entanglement is universal, it doesn’t stop at the boundary of our cosmic patch. Whatever multiverse you have, when you adopt quantum monism they are all part of an integrated whole. There always is a more fundamental layer of reality underlying the many universes within the multiverse, and that layer is unique."

Then the question becomes, why did the apparent designers of this reality bother to create such a convincing illusion, that very greatly complicates the overall scheme?

This is all well and seemingly good, but I am still troubled by an extensive old thread, never fully concluded, on the apparent observable fact that dualism seems to be the best model for the paranormal survival after death data:

https://psiencequest.net/forums/thread-d...death-data

This was a long thread, and I still have a problem with monism because of this reasoning, despite various fairly good arguments against it related to the notion that this apparent dualism must be just a surface appearance (albeit very convincing) at our level of physical existence. Then the question becomes, why did the apparent designers of this reality bother to create such a convincing illusion, that greatly complicates the overall scheme?

It's not very observable at all, IMO, that dualism is the best model for Survival. It certainly isn't the best model for PK, or arguably any other Psi phenomenon.

I could possibly accept Pluralism of some sort over Dualism, because once you have two substances that have some causal interaction you can have more substances to account for the different afterlives. Though the more I think of it this Pluralism seems to suggest some kind of Monist origin, but I guess it's possible two or more substances have always existed.

It's not very observable at all, IMO, that dualism is the best model for Survival. It certainly isn't the best model for PK, or arguably any other Psi phenomenon.

I could possibly accept Pluralism of some sort over Dualism, because once you have two substances that have some causal interaction you can have more substances to account for the different afterlives. Though the more I think of it this Pluralism seems to suggest some kind of Monist origin, but I guess it's possible two or more substances have always existed.

I suggest the best way of expressing survival is in terms of separate environments.  An encompassing math model charts the physical environment.  However, it is not a complete picture.  Seeing information flow and personal experience as another math-modeled environment opens the discussion.  Methodologies of information transfer and decision-making can be complimentary explanations to material reality.  Science already is dependent on models set in informational environments.  Hilbert space provides a setting to sort evolving information from data.  Math and logics are just these same modeled informational environments, specialized for being understood.

Historical thinking is set in the "mental" environment.  One that is, supposedly, walled-off from science as subjective.  Modern science recognizes when communication has happened, then someone knows something and it is measured as mutual information.  Subjective is a descriptive term, but information an agent knows - is objective information all the same when put in action or display.  People already intuit the "mental realm" as an environment.  Activity in this environment can be charted, computed and predictive output assigned probability, with repeatable results.

Mind, in this limited technical definition, becomes an abstract category for classifying natural behavior where real-world probabilities change with the information processing of bio-organisms.   When living things understand, the mutual information from sensation and experience can result in emotions and execute relevant behavior for use in life.  Understanding is NOT a physically measurably action.  It can be measured as output from information processing.  Understanding - as a process - seems rather identical to Psi, only with lower rates of actualization.

With these two modeled environments - one physical/material and one informational/meaningful - all reality is not modeled.  Mind, especially as I just defined it's methodological role, is not spirit.  Hence, I stand as a Pluralist and see effects of an ethical kind.  There is an influence objectively found in the minds of people. It points to the importance of love and kindness that is in a category outside those of matter, energy, information and meaning.  This kind of role in reality for Psi is needed to change the world-view.    

Maybe the Monism can be assigned to this "Other" category, but that is for those much more skilled than I to argue.  I just wanna see a scientific stance that includes depth of thought and factual meaning that exists in all history in all places about Psi.

It's not very observable at all, IMO, that dualism is the best model for Survival. It certainly isn't the best model for PK, or arguably any other Psi phenomenon.

I could possibly accept Pluralism of some sort over Dualism, because once you have two substances that have some causal interaction you can have more substances to account for the different afterlives. Though the more I think of it this Pluralism seems to suggest some kind of Monist origin, but I guess it's possible two or more substances have always existed.

Then what about the specific sort of case of the subjective experience of the NDEer, who may clearly experience himself as leaving his physical body (exiting perhaps from the head, or the chest), to hover over his body in the corner of the ceiling of the emergency room to observe the resuscitation team work on his nearly lifeless body below? Or later in the experience when he may experience himself as traveling elsewhere in the physical world to visit concerned and grieving family or friends. Or later a journey of some sort of long distance through some sort of conduit or tunnel or other transitional stage, into a world of spiritual light? All while his moribund physical body lies being treated at the hospital or still at the accident scene.

In this specific type of experience the NDEer experiences himself as being a non-material mobile center of consciousness able to exit his physical body, perhaps penetrate walls and other physical Earth structures and travel to different locations in the physical and the spiritual worlds or realms. This seems to me pretty clearly interpretable via dualism. How would you interpret this via some sort of monism, other than to posit that the monistic reality has been specifically designed to create a complex set of illusions to mislead the NDEer? If so, then the Ockham's razor principle of parsimony steps in, and the question of why go to so much trouble to create such a complicated set of illusions?

Then what about the specific sort of case of the subjective experience of the NDEer, who may clearly experience himself as leaving his physical body (exiting perhaps from the head, or the chest), to hover over his body in the corner of the ceiling of the emergency room to observe the resuscitation team work on his nearly lifeless body below? Or later in the experience when he may experience himself as traveling elsewhere in the physical world to visit concerned and grieving family or friends. Or later a journey of some sort of long distance through some sort of conduit or tunnel or other transitional stage, into a world of spiritual light? All while his moribund physical body lies being treated at the hospital or still at the accident scene.

In this specific type of experience the NDEer experiences himself as being a non-material mobile center of consciousness able to exit his physical body, perhaps penetrate walls and other physical Earth structures and travel to different locations in the physical and the spiritual worlds or realms. This seems to me pretty clearly interpretable via dualism. How would you interpret this via some sort of monism, other than to posit that the monistic reality has been specifically designed to create a complex set of illusions to mislead the NDEer? If so, then the Ockham's razor principle of parsimony steps in, and the question of why go to so much trouble to create such a complicated set of illusions?

You've asked this many times and the reply is still the same -> How can the NDEr observe anything without causal continuity between the physical world and non-physical body it utilizes while having an OBE?

It's much easier to see the non-physical "subtle body" as part of an underlying monism that is the Ground of Being for the spirit and physical realities than it is to try and explain PK without some kind of continuity between the "non-physical" mental and "physical" objects moved by the mind. Now we can start to talk about intersections between otherwise different realities, why I've talked about Pluralism in the past...but the issue there is the conscious observer is why we know about all the different afterlives and spirit worlds that are claimed to exist....so are souls mental entities that intersect with all realities of otherwise radically different "substances" or is there just a single Monist "substance" that is the Ground of all reality?

I suggest the best way of expressing survival is in terms of separate environments.  An encompassing math model charts the physical environment.  However, it is not a complete picture.  Seeing information flow and personal experience as another math-modeled environment opens the discussion.  Methodologies of information transfer and decision-making can be complimentary explanations to material reality.  Science already is dependent on models set in informational environments.  Hilbert space provides a setting to sort evolving information from data.  Math and logics are just these same modeled informational environments, specialized for being understood.

Historical thinking is set in the "mental" environment.  One that is, supposedly, walled-off from science as subjective.  Modern science recognizes when communication has happened, then someone knows something and it is measured as mutual information.  Subjective is a descriptive term, but information an agent knows - is objective information all the same when put in action or display.  People already intuit the "mental realm" as an environment.  Activity in this environment can be charted, computed and predictive output assigned probability, with repeatable results.

Mind, in this limited technical definition, becomes an abstract category for classifying natural behavior where real-world probabilities change with the information processing of bio-organisms.   When living things understand, the mutual information from sensation and experience can result in emotions and execute relevant behavior for use in life.  Understanding is NOT a physically measurably action.  It can be measured as output from information processing.  Understanding - as a process - seems rather identical to Psi, only with lower rates of actualization.

With these two modeled environments - one physical/material and one informational/meaningful - all reality is not modeled.  Mind, especially as I just defined it's methodological role, is not spirit.  Hence, I stand as a Pluralist and see effects of an ethical kind.  There is an influence objectively found in the minds of people. It points to the importance of love and kindness that is in a category outside those of matter, energy, information and meaning.  This kind of role in reality for Psi is needed to change the world-view.    

Maybe the Monism can be assigned to this "Other" category, but that is for those much more skilled than I to argue.  I just wanna see a scientific stance that includes depth of thought and factual meaning that exists in all history in all places about Psi.

Very dense post Stephen, but also thinking in the right way, and in the right sort of direction IMO. I'll take just one part of it....

There is an influence objectively found in the minds of people. It points to the importance of love and kindness that is in a category outside those of matter, energy, information and meaning.  This kind of role in reality for Psi is needed to change the world-view.

    

Within my own understanding, I'd translate this quote... as the world-view which would create such change, is an understanding that we are all connected, and our experience is a group process.

I see Matter, Energy, Time, Space as slightly higher ways of understanding (meaning) of the information, due to the shared architecture of some processes (i.e. which we all share).

Love - for me, is just adding-up (coherence) of these process patterns (relationships) that we have tagged as attractive (towards), but these same process patterns (relationships) could also be tagged as repelling (away). In that sense, experience process patterns appear to be being ordered towards attractive patterns of coherence, and away from repelling patterns of coherence. (This appears to be rather like a sorting/weighting process).

Kindness - would result from group understanding that we are all connected, and our experience is a group process. What one does to others, one does to oneself.

The problem I have, is that the evidence is clear that some of the 'others' must already know this in some way. Hence a great amount of effort is expended by these 'others', to tell the rest of the group the exact opposite... that we are not connected, and that nature exists separately. These 'others' also use clever methods to make their groups hate (repel) or love (attract) particular labels (patterns) they have defined which divide us... black white, Russian Ukrainian, Gay Straight, East West.

Those clever methods, reduce our chance of becoming coherent with patterns that they have defined as repelling. Similarly these clever methods increase our chance of becoming coherent with patterns that they have defined as attractive. In this way they can influence the rest of the group.

Were such a change in understanding - that we are all connected, and our experience is a group process - to come about, it would obviously undermine the effectiveness of their clever methods of influence.

So... there is an active component within the system which seeks to quash attempts to bring such a changed world-view about, and instead this active component promotes the opposite. That's a really major problem... this is not a passive problem of how to make this changed world-view come about, there is a dynamic force within the system which is actively opposing such change.

How do we counter this highly active component that seeks to prevent such change in our world-view.

You've asked this many times and the reply is still the same -> How can the NDEr observe anything without causal continuity between the physical world and non-physical body it utilizes while having an OBE?

It's much easier to see the non-physical "subtle body" as part of an underlying monism that is the Ground of Being for the spirit and physical realities than it is to try and explain PK without some kind of continuity between the "non-physical" mental and "physical" objects moved by the mind. Now we can start to talk about intersections between otherwise different realities, why I've talked about Pluralism in the past...but the issue there is the conscious observer is why we know about all the different afterlives and spirit worlds that are claimed to exist....so are souls mental entities that intersect with all realities of otherwise radically different "substances" or is there just a single Monist "substance" that is the Ground of all reality?

I might then cite one of Tim's many excellent examples of veridical NDEs experienced as a mostly noninteracting spirit still remaining in the physical world to observe, after leaving his/her physical body, the moribund body being worked on by the physicians (https://psiencequest.net/forums/thread-n...4#pid50984). Actual real vivid nitty gritty experience: 

"This is the report of a very senior surgeon from Spain, Dr Manuel Sans Segarra, who was on duty at the Bellvitge hospital in Barcelona, when one of the actual hospital staff (coincidentally) was brought in dead (in cardiac arrest) from a very serious car accident. She suffered catastrophic internal injuries and trauma (apparently).

She was eventually resuscitated and her life was saved by his surgical intervention. When she woke up (or some time later) it seems the surgeon who had an interest in NDE's (because some of his trauma patients had reported them) gently enquired if she remembered anything from the time of her arrest (or when she was brought in)

At first she wouldn't talk about it but then it apparently all came out...she'd seen everything from a position above the trauma/operating room in detail and knew exactly what had occurred. She even tried to talk to the surgeon and attempted to touch him with her hand (whatever a disembodied/spiritual hand is) but it simply passed right through him (of course).

She not only knew what was going on in the room there, when she was dead (flat EEG he says) but she also saw what was going on in adjacent rooms, particularly one where a patient was undergoing an operation on his neck. She saw that (that precise procedure) and reported to the surgeon who then went to check the computer records which proved her right.

I invite the perennial, always doubting sceptics, to provide an explanation for this case which mirrors many others in the literature. (hint--more than one rock falling from the sky) This is what all the fuss is about and this is why materialism cannot be correct."

How could this NDEer reasonably interpret her vivid actual experience as other than that of being a now disembodied spirit (having left her physical body), of a fundamentally different substance than matter especially since she is now interpenetrating matter with almost no interaction (other than being able to somehow intercept and perceive physical light rays in the room and other locations in the hospital)? Of course, a Monistic universal common substance could well underlie this apparent and subjectively convincing illusion, but the most important practical experiences of the disembodied human spirit are of something very like dualism. It looks as if this practical interpretation of dualism in this particular situation trumps philosophical theory. 

And the question still stubbornly remains unanswered, why and how the elaborate illusion?

(other than being able to somehow intercept and perceive physical light rays in the room and other locations in the hospital)? Of course, a Monistic universal common substance could well underlie this apparent and subjectively convincing illusion, but the most important practical experiences of the disembodied human spirit are of something very like dualism. It looks as if this practical interpretation of dualism in this particular situation trumps philosophical theory. 

And the question still stubbornly remains unanswered, why and how the elaborate illusion?

That's a pretty big "other than"?

This conception of a single substance making the soul/body distinction an "illusion" is just some bizarre assumption on your part.

When one adds in all the Survival & Psi evidence, Monism seems like the best answer....though as I said one could posit a Pluralism where the soul is made from kind of special substance whose causal capabilities allow it to intersect with not only this world but the varied (and sometimes wildly different) afterlives...

The more I think about it seems to me Dualism is only the result of cherry picking certain NDEs and then ignoring other NDES but also PK, Reincarnation, Apparitions, and so on...