Parallel Presentiment Tests Can Verify the Effectiveness of Our Free-Choices
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31156/jaex.25274Keywords:
consciousness, quantum collapse, effective free choice, presentiment, decoherent historiesAbstract
Our inability to rewind time may cast some doubt about the genuineness of the effectiveness of our free choice capability. I suggest that the so-called presentiment anomalous experience can be used to verify this genuineness. The idea is to post stimulus compare averaged results from two apparently “similar” presentiment tests ("channels") carried out simultaneously on the same individual. Before the occurrence of the stimulus an experimenter decides, in real time, whether to observe the measurements in any channel or not and immediately performs this decision before the occurrence of the stimulus. A case in which a channel is observed during real time and a case in which it has not belong to different decoherent histories. This holds true because according to the “Orthodox Interpretation” of quantum mechanics the conscious observation collapses the multitude of possible pre stimulus measurements to just the perceived one. In such cases quantum mechanics imposes a disappearance of the retrospective presentiment effect. Thus, in such a parallel design one can compare what happens when an observation is carried out and is not carried out at the same time instance. The presentiment effect disappearance in the observed channel despite its appearance in the unobserved channel for the same moments is thus evidence for the effectiveness of the experimenter's willed observation.
References
Aharonov, Y., & Rohrlich, D. (2005). Quantum paradoxes. Wiley-VCH.
Alvarez, F. (2016). An experiment on precognition with planarian worms. Journal of Scientific Exploration, 30, 217-226.
Bell, J. S. (1964, November 1). On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox. Physics Physique Fizika, 1(3), 195-200. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysicsPhysiqueFizika.1.195
Bell, J. S. (1977, February). Free variables and local causality. Epistemological Letters (15) 79-84.
Bierman, D. J. (2006, October). Empirical research on the radical subjective solution of the measurement problem. Does time get its direction through conscious observation? American Institute of Physics (AIP) Conference Proceedings, 863(1), 238-259. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2388757
Bohr, N. (1935). Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Physical Review, 48(8) 696-702. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.48.696
Born, M. (1926). Zur quantenmechanik der stoßvorgänge [On the quantum mechanics of collisions]. Zeitschrift für Physik 37, 863-867.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01397477
Capek, M. (Ed.) (1976). Concepts of space and time. D. Reidel.
Duggan, M., & Tressoldi, P. E. (2018, July 17). Predictive physiological anticipatory activity preceding seemingly unpredictable stimulus: An update of Mossbridge et al's meta-analysis. F1000Research, 7, 407.
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.14330.2
Greene, B. (2004). The fabric of the cosmos: Space, time, and the texture of reality. Alfred A. Knopf.
Hossenfelder, S., & Palmer, T. (2020, May 6). Rethinking superdeterminism. Frontiers in Physics 8:139, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2020.00139
Levin, E. Y. (2020). The presentiment effect as a quantum delusion. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice, 7(2), 189–205. https://doi.org/10.1037/cns0000207
Levin, E. Y. (2023). The presentiment effect points to an occurrence of a von Neumann's collapse. Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition, 3(1), 174-193. https://doi.org/10.31156/jaex.24455
Lucido, R. J. (under review). Replication of results from a test of the consciousness causes collapse interpretation of quantum mechanics using subliminal priming methodology. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.28706.81608
Lucido, R. J. (2023). Testing the consciousness causing collapse interpretation of quantum mechanics using subliminal primes derived from random fluctuations in radioactive decay. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research, 14(3), 185-194. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.20344.72969
Mossbridge, J. A., & Radin, D. (2018, March). Precognition as a form of prospection: A review of the evidence. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice 5(1), 78-93. https://doi.org/10.1037/cns0000121
Murphy, S. T., & Zajonc, R. B. (1993). Affect, cognition, and awareness: affective priming with optimal and suboptimal stimulus exposures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 64(5), 723-739. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.64.5.723
Pauli, W. (1954). Letter to Born, 31 March 1954. In M. Born (Ed.), 1971, The Born-Einstein Letters. Walker and Co.
Radin, D. (2023). Sentiment and presentiment in twitter: Do trends in collective mood “feel the future”? World Futures, 79(5), 525-535. https://doi.org/10.1080/02604027.2023.2216629
Schlosshauer, M., Koer, J., & Zeilinger, A. (2013). A snapshot of foundational attitudes toward quantum mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 44(3), 222-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsb.2013.04.004
Stapp, H. P. (2014). Quantum physics and philosophy of mind. In A. Corradini, and U. Meixner (Eds.), Quantum physics meets the philosophy of mind, pp. 5-16. Walter de Gruyter GmbH.
Stapp, H. P. (2017a). Retrocausation in quantum mechanics and the effects of minds on the creation of physical reality. AIP Conference Proceedings 1841, 040001. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4982777
Stapp, H. P. (2017b). On the nature of things: Human presence in the world of atoms. Springer-Verlag. https://sites.google.com/a/lbl.gov/stappfiles
Wigner, E. P. (1961). Remarks on the mind–body question. In I. J. Good (Ed.), The scientist speculates, pp. 284-302. Heinemann.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Ephraim Y. Levin
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All articles published in JAEX are open access, freely and universally accessible online, and archived in the open journal’s Lund University website (https://journals.lub.lu.se). Articles in JAEX can be distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License CCBY (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, with appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, a link to the Creative Commons license, and an indication if changes were made.
