Schrdinger's Cat: Research on the Radical Subjective Solution of the Measurement Problem.

1
Schrödinger's Cat Research on the Radical
Subjective Solution of the Measurement Problem.

• .

Dick Bierman Stephen Whitmarsh, University of
Amsterdam Presented at QuantumMind, Salzburg,
july 15-21, 2007
2
NO !!!!
3
If the measurement is affecting the measured it
is extremely important to precisely define what
constitutes a measurement
4
Measurement

• Def1 A measurement is something what you do with
  a measurement device.
• Usable in the daily practice of physics
• But incorrect a problem!
• (von Neumann)

5
The Measurement Problemsolutions

• Many World solution (Everett)
• Deterministic solution (Bohm)
• Non linear Schrodinger equation (GRW)
• Objective Reduction (Penrose)
• Radical subjective solution (Wigner, Stapp)

6
Radical Solution

• . The reduction of the state vector is a
  physical event which occurs only when there is an
  interaction between the physical measuring
  apparatus and the psyche of some observer..
• from Hall, J., Kim, C., McElroy, and Shimony, A.
  (1977). Wave-packet reduction as a medium of
  communication. Foundations of Physics 7 (1977),
  759-767.

Note that the radical solution is associated with
Schrödingers Cat.
7
Hall et al experiment
8
Assumptions

• Consciousness of first observer collapses the
  state before second observation.
• 2. Final Observer (brain) is sensitive for
  difference collapsed and non collapsed state
• 3. Final Observer can report this

9
Weaknesses in Hall

• Assumption 1 is violated Delay between first and
  second observation too short
• Assumption 3 is inconsistent The dependent
  variable is a conscious verbal report, too late!

10
Improvements in replications

• HALL et al 1977
• Delay few microseconds
• Dependent variable conscious verbal report

• Amsterdam 2002-2007
• Delay 1000 msecs
• Dependent variable brain signals before final
  observer is conscious p

11
Amsterdam original set-up
12
Amsterdam original set-up
Dependent variable brainwaves of final observer
Pseudorandom switch between conditions
Pre-observed - not pre-observed
13
Analysis procedure

• Predetermined we only analyze peak amplitudes.
• We also apply non-parametric statistics (because
  of non normality of the distribution of data)

14
Results pooled over condition
N200
N160
P100
15
Results split for condition(preobserved and
not-preobserved)
16
Study 1-RESULTS peak analysis
17
Control analysis

• Split data randomly rather than according to Exp.
  Condition and repeat analysis.
• Effectsizes are on the average an order of
  magnitude smaller and statistically non
  significant

18
Conclusions study 1
Bohr

• Copenhagen interpretation supported
• God plays dice
• And Consciousness stands outside of quantum
  physics (dualism) or must be considered a hidden
  variable with non local aspects
• But wait a minute Strong claims need strong
  evidence.. So study 2!

19
Replication set up
Alpha source
GM detector
Count down clock
EEG amplifiers
Trigger-in
delay
Audio-beep
Final Observer
Computer
Visual pre-observation for 50 of the events
Pre Observer
20
Results averaged over 4 conditions
(classical-quantum, preobserved- not preobserved)
4 clusters of electrodes
21
(No Transcript)
22
No pre-observation effect

• But

23
An effect of source of events (Quantum vs Classic)
24
Was the (pre) Observation Conscious

• It was less specific than in experiment 1

25
Study 3

• More information to pre-observer
• - I.e. was the source quantum or classic
• Control of decay-times distribution in all
  conditions.

26
Preliminary Results study 3
27
Review
28
Amsterdam 1
29
Amsterdam 2
30
Amsterdam 3
31
Conclusion

• The support for the idea that consciousness
  collapses the statevector has evaporated.
• Initial results due to differences in decay time
  distribution?
• However it could be that the assumptions
  underlying this approach are invalid.
• The measurement problem is more alive than ever.

32
Thanks for your attention