Advertisement

Axiomathes

, Volume 26, Issue 3, pp 313–328 | Cite as

Mental, behavioural and physiological nonlocal correlations within the Generalized Quantum Theory framework

  • Harald Walach
  • Patrizio Tressoldi
  • Luciano Pederzoli
Original Paper

Abstract

Generalized Quantum Theory (GQT) seeks to explain and predict quantum-like phenomena in areas usually outside the scope of quantum physics, such as biology and psychology. It draws on fundamental theories and uses the algebraic formalism of quantum theory that is used in the study of observable physical matter such as photons, electrons, etc. In contrast to quantum theory proper, GQT is a very generalized form that does not allow for the full application of formalism. For instance neither a commutator, such as Planck’s constant, nor any additive operations are defined, which precludes the usage of a full Hilbert-space formalism. But it is a formalized phenomenological theory that is applicable whenever the core element of a quantum theory needs to be captured, namely in the presence of incompatible or non-commuting operations. As a consequence, it also predicts nonlocal, generalized entanglement correlations in systems other than proper quantum systems. In this paper we summarize the specific scientific evidence relating to the quantum-like mental, behavioral and physiological nonlocal correlations. Such non-local, generalized entanglement correlations are expected, both in space and time, between subsystems of a larger system, whenever observables pertaining to the global system are incompatible or complementary to observables pertaining to subsystems, as predicted by GQT. The result is a coherent explanation of a significant amount of controversial and seemingly weird occurrences that cannot be explained by classical physical laws. This review also offers a new perspective of the human mind’s potential.

Keywords

Generalized Quantum Theory Entanglement Nonlocal correlation Mind-matter interaction Perception at distance 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Cinzia Evangelista for the English translation and revision and the two reviewers for their accurate revision of the paper and their detailed suggestions on how to improve its clarity.

References

  1. Aharonov Y, Cohen E, Grossman D, Elizutr AC (2014) Can a future choice affect a past measurement’s outcome? In: Proceedings of the EPJ web of conferences, vol 70 (Les Ulis: EDP Sciences), 00038. doi: 10.1051/epjconf/20147000038
  2. Alcock JE (2003) Give the null hypothesis a chance: reasons to remain doubtful about the existence of PSI. J Conscious Stud 10(6–7):29–50Google Scholar
  3. Aspect A, Grangier P, Roger G (1982a) Experimental realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm Gedankenexperiment: a new violation of Bell’s inequalities. Phys Rev Lett 49(2):91–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aspect A, Dalibard J, Roger G (1982b) Experimental test of Bell’s inequalities using time-varying analyzers. Phys Rev Lett 49(25):1804–1807CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Atmanspacher H, Filk T (2010) A proposed test of temporal nonlocality in bistable perception. J Math Psychol 54:314–321. doi: 10.1016/j.jmp.2009.12.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Atmanspacher H, Filk T (2013) The Necker-Zeno model for bistable perception. Topic Cogn Sci 5:800–817. doi: 10.1111/tops.12044 Google Scholar
  7. Atmanspacher H, Römer H, Walach H (2002) Weak quantum theory: complementarity and entanglement in physics and beyond. Found Phys 32:379–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Atmanspacher H, Filk T, Römer H (2006) Weak quantum theory: formal framework and selected applications. In: Adenier G, Khrennikov A, Nieuwenhuizen TM (eds) Quantum theory: reconsiderations of foundations. American Institute of Physics, New York, pp 34–46Google Scholar
  9. Baptista J, Derakhshani M, Tressoldi P (2015) Explicit anomalous cognition. A review of the best evidence in Ganzfeld, forced—choice, remote viewing and dream studies. In: Cardeña E, Palmer J, Marcusson-Clavertz D (eds) Parapsychology. A handbook for the 21st century, McFarlandGoogle Scholar
  10. Bem DJ, Tressoldi PE, Rabeyron T, Duggan M (2015) A meta-analysis of 90 experiments on the anomalous anticipation of random future events. F1000Research 4:1188. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.7177.1
  11. Bösch H, Steinkamp F, Boller E (2006) Examining psychokinesis: the interaction of human intention with random number generators-A meta-analysis. Psychol Bull 132(4):497–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Capra F, Luisi PL (2014) The systems view of life. A unifying vision. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Einstein A, Podolsky B, Rosen N (1935) Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Phys Rev 47(10):777–780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Filk T (2013) Temporal non-locality. Found Phys 43(4):533–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Filk T, Römer H (2011) Generalized quantum theory: overview and latest developments. Axiomathes 21(2):211–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Genovese M (2010) Interpretations of quantum mechanics and measurement problem. Adv Sci Lett 3(3):249–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Giroldini W, Pederzoli L, Bilucaglia M et al (2016) EEG correlates of social interaction at distance. F1000Research 4:457. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.6755.5
  18. Gisin N (2014) Quantum chance: nonlocality, teleportation and other quantum marvels. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Giustina M, Mech A, Ramelow S, Wittmann B, Kofler J, Beyer J, Zeilinger A et al (2013) Bell violation using entangled photons without the fair-sampling assumption. Nature 497(7448):227–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hensen B, Bernien H, Dréau AE, Reiserer A, Kalb N, Blok MS, Amaya W (2015) Loophole-free Bell inequality violation using electron spins separated by 1.3 kilometres. Nature 526(7575):682–686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Horodecki R, Horodecki P, Horodecki M, Horodecki K (2009) Quantum entanglement. Rev Mod Phys 81(2):865–942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kahneman D (2011) Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Khrennikov A (2010) Ubiquitous quantum structure from psychology to finance. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kofler J, Brukner C (2013) Condition for macroscopic realism beyond the Leggett–Garg inequalities. Phys Rev A 87:052115. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.87.052115 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Leggett AJ, Garg A (1985) Quantum mechanics versus macroscopic realism: is the flux there when nobody looks? Phys Rev Lett 54:857–860CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mossbridge J, Tressoldi P, Utts J (2012) Predictive physiological anticipation preceding seemingly unpredictable stimuli: a meta-analysis. Front Psychol 3:390. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00390 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nelson R, Bancel P (2011) Effects of mass consciousness: changes in random data during global events. Explore 7:373–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Olson SJ, Ralph TC (2012) Extraction of timelike entanglement from the quantum vacuum. Phys Rev A 85:012306. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.85.012306 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pauli W (1957) Phänomen und physikalische Realität, Dialectica,11, pp. 36–48. English translation in Enz CP, von Meyenn K (eds) (1994) Wolfgang Pauli: writings on physics and philosophy. Springer, Berlin, pp 127–135Google Scholar
  30. Paz JP, Mahler G (1993) Proposed test for temporal Bell inequalities. Phys Rev Lett 71:3235–3239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pothos EM, Busemeyer JR (2013) Can quantum probability provide a new direction for cognitive modeling. Behav Brain Sci 36:255–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Radin D, Michel L, Galdamez K, Wendland P, Rickenbach R, Delorme A (2012) Consciousness and the double-slit interference pattern: six experiments. Phys Essays 25(2):157–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Radin D, Michel L, Johnston J, Delorme A (2013) Psychophysical interactions with a double-slit interference pattern. Phys Essays 26(4):553–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Radin D, Michel L, Delorme A (2016) Psychophysical modulation of fringe visibility in a distant double-slit optical system. Phys Essays 29(1):14–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Roe CA, Sonnex C, Roxburgh EC (2014) Two meta-analyses of noncontact healing studies. EXPLORE: J Sci Heal 11:11–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Scheidl T, Ursin R, Kofler J, Ramelow S, Ma XS, Herbst T, Zeilinger A et al (2010) Violation of local realism with freedom of choice. Proc Natl Acad Sci 107(46):19708–19713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schlosshauer M, Kofler J, Zeilinger A (2013) The interpretation of quantum mechanics: from disagreement to consensus? Ann Phys 525(4):A51–A54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schmidt S (2012) Can we help just by good intentions? A meta-analysis of experiments on distant intention effects. J Altern Complement Med 18(6):529–533. doi: 10.1089/acm.2011.0321 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schrödinger E (1935) Discussion of probability relations between separated systems. Proc Camb Philos Soc 31:555–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Storm L, Sherwood SJ, Roe CA, Tressoldi PE, Rock AJ, Di Risio L (submitted). On the correspondence between dream content and target material under laboratory conditions: a meta-analysis of dream-ESP studies, 1966–2014Google Scholar
  41. Tressoldi PE (2011) Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence: the case of non-local perception, a classical and Bayesian review of evidences. Front Psychol 2:117. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00117 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tressoldi P (2013) Does system 1 process both local and nonlocal information in intuitive judgment and decision making? Available evidence and a research agenda proposal. Psychology 4(11):798–803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tressoldi PE, Khrennikov A (2012) Remote state preparation of mental information: a theoretical model and a summary of experimental evidence. NeuroQuantology 10(3):394–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tressoldi PE, Maier MA, Buechner VL, Khrennikov A (2015) A macroscopic violation of no-signaling in time inequalities? How to test temporal entanglement with behavioral observables. Front Psychol 6:1061. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01061 Google Scholar
  45. Tressoldi P, Pederzoli L, Matteoli M, Prati E (in press) Can our minds emit light at distance? A pre-registered confirmatory experiment of mental entanglement with a photomultiplier. Neuroquantology. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2654264
  46. Uzan P (2014) On the nature of psychophysical correlations. Mind Matter 12(1):7–36Google Scholar
  47. Vedral V (2010) Decoding reality: the universe as quantum information. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  48. von Lucadou W (2015) The model of pragmatic information (MPI). In: May EC, Marwaha S (eds) Extrasensory perception: support, skepticism, and science, vol 2., Theories and the future of the fieldPraeger, Santa Barbara, Ca, pp 221–242Google Scholar
  49. von Lucadou W, Römer H, Walach H (2007) Synchronistic phenomena as entanglement correlations in generalized quantum theory. J Conscious Stud 14(4):50–74Google Scholar
  50. Von Neumann J (1955) Mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics (No. 2). Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  51. Walach H, von Stillfried N (2011) Generalised Quantum Theory—basic idea and general intuition: a background story and overview. Axiomathes 21(2):185–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Walach H, von Lucadou W, Römer H (2014) Parapsychological phenomena as examples of generalized nonlocal correlations—a theoretical framework. J Sci Exp 28(4):605–631Google Scholar
  53. Walach H, Horan M, Hinterberger T, von Lucadou W (in press) Evidence for a generalised type of nonlocal correlations between systems using human intention and random event generators. PLoS OneGoogle Scholar
  54. Wheeler JA, Zurek WH (eds) (2014) Quantum theory and measurement. Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
  55. Wigner E (1967) Symmetries and reflections, scientific essays. Indiana University Press, BloomingtonGoogle Scholar
  56. Yearsley JM, Pothos EM (2014) Challenging the classical notion of time in cognition: a quantum perspective. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 281(1781):20133056CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zeilinger A (2005) The message of the quantum. Nature 438(7069):743CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harald Walach
    • 1
  • Patrizio Tressoldi
    • 2
  • Luciano Pederzoli
    • 3
  1. 1.Institut für Transkulturelle GesundheitswissenschaftenEuropa Universität ViadrinaFrankfurtGermany
  2. 2.Dipartimento di Psicologia GeneraleUniversità di PadovaPaduaItaly
  3. 3.EvanLabFlorenceItaly

Personalised recommendations