Consciousness as an ultra-weak quantum measurement effect in an optical diffraction experiment
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Experimental study Preregistered |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 47 |
| Population | Individuals selected via a worldwide search for people with experience in focusing their attention |
| Key findings | The combined data did not support three preregistered hypotheses about human observation acting as a weak quantum measurement. Exploratory analyses found a significant difference in interference reduction between participants with outward versus inward attentional focus (p = 0.008), a difference in skewness between observed and unobserved periods (p = 0.004), and a progressive decline in interference during observation versus a simultaneously unobserved portion (p = 5.9 × 10-14), with no such trend during no-observation periods (p = 0.77). Control runs without observers were nonsignificant. |
Abstract
The consciousness-collapse interpretation of quantum mechanics was explored by testing if human observation might act like a weak quantum measurement effect in an optical interferometer. Forty-seven participants selected via a worldwide search for individuals with experience in focusing their attention were each provided with a custom-made optical apparatus. Using this device, they ran a preassigned series of test sessions to see if illumination recorded in a portion of the interference pattern would be affected when a feedback signal based on that measure was observed versus unobserved. Another portion of the interference pattern was recorded simultaneously but never observed to provide control data. Environmental sensors and real-time encryption of the illumination data were among the methods included in the design of the experiment to help ensure data integrity.With all data combined the results did not support three preregistered hypotheses, but for one of those hypotheses participants partitioned by those experienced in an outward vs. an inward focus of attention achieved significantly better results in reducing interference (p = 0.008). An exploratory hypothesis also found a significant difference in skewness of the distribution of interference measures recorded in observed vs. unobserved periods (p = 0.004). In addition, an exploratory analysis showed a clear trend – a progressive decline in interference – while participants observed a portion of the interference pattern, as compared to data recorded simultaneously from an unobserved portion (p = 5.9 × 10-14). By comparison, applying the same analysis during no-observation periods found no differences in trends (p = 0.77). Control data run with no observers present and subjected again to this same trend analysis showed uniformly nonsignificant results. Alternative explanations, including possible environmental influences that might have caused these outcomes, as well as recommendations for future studies, are discussed.