The Conscious Dimension

by Allan Chubb

Physics and Quantum Theory

The physics of the everyday world is largely observable directly with our senses. This is not so with the quantum world; the world of molecules, atoms quanta of radiation and the components that make up atoms, protons, neutrons, quarks, gluons and electrons. These are all too small for us to observe directly. Small groups or individual atoms have been visualised with various instruments but these actually show an enlarged image and not the original atom or molecule itself.

This creates a philosophical problem since the human mind finds it difficult to visualise or imagine phenomena at the quantum level. We tend to think in terms of particles and waves. These images may become elaborated as we probe quantum phenomena further. However, as we shall soon see, quantum phenomena often present us with situations which do not make sense in terms we have come to expect from our everyday experience. The term ‘counter intuitive’ is used to describe this aspect of quantum phenomena. The Danish physicist, Niels Bohr (1885 – 1962) who was instrumental in developing much of Quantum Theory, said that anyone who is not perplexed by Quantum Theory has not understood it. There are many aspects to this but we will outline some of the main points since it important to realise that these phenomena exist and are believed to have some bearing on consciousness.

The Two Slit Experiment

A good place to start is what has been called ‘natures conjuring trick’, the two slit experiment.

In essence, a barrier with two small slits very close together is placed at a measured distance in front of a screen which can detect light or other particles. These are fired at the screen with the slits in it. It is observed whether the light or the particles pass through one or both slits. If the particle passes through either the right or left slit it creates a distinctive pattern on the detector screen. If it goes through both slits simultaneously it creates an interference pattern.

To imagine this consider a slit screen to be half immersed in water. This time, we are observing at the classical level of everyday experience and there is only one slit. Now we first drop a stone into the water and observe the wave pattern as it passes through the slit in the screen.

Then we use a two slit screen and drop a stone into the water. You will realise that if the slits are a suitable distance apart the waves passing through the slits will interfere with each other after doing so. At the quantum level a similar effect results if a light is passed through the two slits, showing up on the detector screen as an interference pattern.

It is now possible to pass a single photon through the two slit experiment and observe the result on the detector screen. In this case an interference pattern occurs suggesting the photon has passed through both slits simultaneously. However, it is possible to place a detector device after a slit to discover whether the photon has passed through that slit. When the detector is switched on it does not detect a photon because in this case the photon passes through the other slit. We can now place a detector after the second slit and switch it on to find the reverse happens and the photon only passes through the slit without a detector. In both cases after passing through one slit it reaches the detector screen at the rear.

Now we begin to see why it is called ‘nature’s conjuring trick’. The photon seems to know what has been done and goes the other way. When Einstein first saw the experiment he said “God does not like being watched”. However, scientists were not content to leave the matter there. When it became possible to measure time intervals of the order of one billionth of a second the experiment was set up so that the decision to switch on one or the other of the detectors was made after the photon passed through the slits, but before it reached the detector. The photon still behaved in the same way. To eliminate any conscious involvement in the decision making it was made by a random device at the appropriate time. Again the photon behaved in the same way. This only deepens the mystery. Not only does this experiment demonstrate that the photon has the ability to decide which slit to pass through, it also demonstrates what is known as the ‘particle wave duality’. In other words the photon can behave as a wave or a particle. An ingenious experiment devised by an Indian and carried out by the Japanese showed that the photon can do both at the same time. Similar experiments with the two slit experiment have used electrons, protons, atoms and even a giant molecule containing about 60 atoms of carbon, known as a ‘bucky ball’, in place of of a photon.

You will now understand why the term ‘counter intuitive’ is used about various aspects of quantum theory. Quantum physicists are constantly confronted by such phenomena and have come to accept this as part of the real world although in terms of everyday experience they do not understand it.

Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principal

Making measurements at the quantum level also presents problems. Heisenberg has demonstrated that if you measure the position of a particle you cannot at the same time measure it’s speed, and vice versa. Further, if you measure the speed its position is unpredictable. If you measure the position its speed is then unpredictable. You may imagine that this is a technical problem associated with the measurement at this level, but this is not the case. The problem lies with locating the particle, which is rather fuzzy, performing more as a probability than as a concrete object. Einstein (1879 – 1995) was not happy with this aspect of quantum theory, with his now famous saying, “ God does not play dice”, to which Niels Bohr replied, “Stop telling God what to do”.

The probabilistic nature of quantum phenomena is well illustrated by partial reflection. This occurs in certain lighting conditions when you see a reflection in a pane of glass but are also able to view what lies beyond it. It is known that for glass panes of a certain thickness a predictable amount of light will be reflected and a predictable amount will pass through. Thus the proportion of light reflected is known as the partial reflection probability. The reason that it is termed a probability is that if you were to examine what each molecule does it would be impossible to predict whether an individual molecule would reflect the light or pass it though. All that can be predicted is the percentage of molecules which will reflect the light, thus the use of probabilities when dealing with quantum phenomena.

When individual atoms are studied it is often found that an atom will be in two contradictory states at the same time. This situation is known as being in superposition. Some form of observation or measurement resolves the superposition. We have seen in the case of the two slit experiment how the measurement, by switching on the detector, resolved, or collapsed, the superposition of passing through both slits at the same time. There are various attempts to understand the collapse of the superposition. At first it was considered that conscious observation was necessary. However, the most sophisticated version of the two slit experiment leaves the measurement and it’s decision to a random device. Nevertheless, the purist might say that it still needs a conscious effort to set up the experiment.

The Boiling Pot Experiment

Another example of quantum weirdness involves the way that observation can stop things from happening. John Gribbin describes an experiment at the quantum level which he calls ‘watching the quantum pot’. A ‘pot’ of a few thousand beryllium ions was used for the experiment. Ions are atoms which have had one or more electrons stripped from them. This enables the ions to be controlled in the experiment. Because the beryllium ions have an overall positive electrical charge it is possible to hold them in a kind of electrical trap, or ‘pot’ for 256 milliseconds. These were irradiated with radio waves of the appropriate frequency which would normally raise the ions from energy level 1 to energy level 2 in this time. A technique was developed so that the ions could be observed every 4 milliseconds. When this was done 99.9% of the ions remained at level 1. This demonstrated that watching these ions had prevented the ‘pot’ from boiling to level 2. It is believed that had it been technically possible to view the beryllium ions continuously all of them would have been found at level 1, an interesting quantum phenomena. A description of this experiment can be found in John Gribbin’s book, ‘Schrodinger’s Kittens and the Search for Reality’, Published by Phoenix, 1995, pages 133 to 135.

Entanglement

Another aspect of quantum theory is being investigated in relation to consciousness, this is the phenomena known as entanglement. In essence, entanglement is the situation when two similar atoms are put into an identical state regarding their spin states and magnetic moments. We need not concern ourselves too much at the moment with these states of the atom. They are manipulated in the laboratory by subjecting the atoms to strong magnetic fields. If this manipulation is identical, afterwards any change induced in one of the atoms instantaneously affects the other. The experiment has been performed with entangled atoms several kilometres apart with instantaneous results. It is believed that if the second atom were to travel a distance of light years and then the experiment was carried out the effect on the second atom would still be instantaneous. This is the phenomena of entanglement.

Nature seems to have a method of entangling atoms in a natural way without using strong magnetic fields. This is the aspect of entanglement and quantum theory which is being investigated with respect to consciousness. We have seen how different areas of the brain specialise in different functions, for example, there is a visual area, an auditory area and a tactile or sensory somesthetic area. These are spaced apart in the brain although connected by neural pathways. Most normal people report that they experience consciousness as a unity. If they are walking along a road they may at the same moment be aware of the muscular sensations in their body, the sight of a bird singing in a tree and the sound of the bird singing. These are not perceived as disjointed but as a unity. This raises a problem. How is it that sensations at different locations in the brain are perceived in this way? It has been proposed that this could be achieved by nature’s version of entanglement. This is a current topic of research and experiments are inconclusive at the present time.

As an applied mathematician, Sir Roger Penrose is interested in entanglement in nature. He points out that entanglement is occurring all the time and that if there were no means in nature to untangle atoms eventually the whole universe would become entangled. In other words, all the atoms in the universe would become entangled with each other. Clearly this does not happen so nature must have a means of untangling atoms with time. Sir Roger is proposing that it is gravity which performs this function, both in the brain and in the universe at large. It should soon be possible to put this theory to the test.

These are the main phenomena of quantum weirdness, but other lines of research include studies in Australia which have produced beams of negative energy, that is, beams of coldness. In New Zealand work has been done on observing the creation of virtual particles. These are particles of matter and antimatter at the quantum level which exist for a fleeting moment of time. Perhaps the creation of Higg’s particle in the Large Hedron Collider has caught the imagination most, being called the God particle by some. During the Big Bang such particles would have appeared very much as virtual particles occur today but of a more enduring nature. The creation of the Higg’s particles at the time of the Big Bang is surely an example of quantum weirdness in that it arises almost magically.

Clearly the universe in which we live is a remarkable place, and at the quantum level not one which is easily understood by the human mind.