6
$\begingroup$

  1. Does Free Will Theorem imply that quantum mechanics plays crucial role in our brain’s functioning (consciousness)?

  2. Is opposite statement of Free Will Theorem right: If elementary particles have a certain amount of free will, then so must we?

Because to me elementary particles does have a bit of free will – quantum mechanics guarantees that nobody can predict what one is going to do, say in double slit experiment.

  1. So Penrose was right and origins of our consciousness lie in the laws of quantum mechanics?

  2. Is the only way our free will can come from is that of quantum mechanics?

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
1

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
7
$\begingroup$

The Free will theorem of Conway and Kochen is simply an unfortunately titled theorem that, just like Bell's theorem, rules out a certain kind of hidden variable theory, i.e. shows that measurement results cannot be ultimately determined (if it is not somehow determined what measurement will be made, that's the "free will" of the experimenters), but are probabilistic in their very nature.

That's all. To assert that the indeterminacy of measurement results is, in some way, equivalent to a notion of "free will" (whose consistent and uncontroversial definition has eluded philosophers for aeons, and is certainly not a well-defined physical term), is a proposition that is not grounded upon any physical principle.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

I would bet that consciousness is an emergent property of our neural network and not a quantum mechanical effect. Quantum effects are most probably washed away very quickly by the thermal bath in our brain.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

I am under the impression that the uncertainty principle is simply an epistemic principle in that our uncertainty is only a function of our inability to make a measurement weak enough to not destroy the prior information we had about the system. This is the reason we have a wave function in the first place. To the free will question, what do you mean when you say free will? Do you mean that the particles have a choice in their evolution? The answer is of course not.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The uncertainty principle is not commonly understood as epistemic, cf. e.g. the answers to this question. $\endgroup$
    – ACuriousMind ♦
    Commented Mar 16, 2016 at 21:00
  • $\begingroup$ What is it that the uncertainty applies to? The information about certain quantities which we can measure. Since we are concerned with measurements here, this is ultimately of epistemic concern. I understand that the mainstream view is that this is an ontic statement. What does it mean for this to be a property of nature? Does nature concern itself with the positions of particles? $\endgroup$
    – N. Carrara
    Commented Mar 16, 2016 at 21:18
0
$\begingroup$

Penrose is saying things much more subtle in his book "The Emperor's New Mind". I wouldn't attempt to describe it.

Another view is by Minsky in "Society of Mind". Again, I think he does a far better job of explaining it than I could, though in that video he's talking more about consciousness. Free will is just another one of those descriptions we make of ourselves when we don't really have any idea how the whole thing works.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.