A Quantum Perspective on the Physiologic Response
Given a well posed question about the world to which one’s attention is directed quantum theory says that nature either gives the affirmative answer, in which case there occurs an experience describable as “Yes, I perceive it!” or, alternatively, no experience occurs in connection with that question.
- Henry Stapp, “Attention, Intention and Will in Quantum Physics”
Until very recently, little work existed to explain how and why the physiologic response works on the universal level Hawkins has discovered. (An explanation of how the physiologic response works from an energy/life force perspective has been discussed in various texts, linking the acupuncture meridians to the muscle’s reaction.[1]) The following explanation is derived mainly from Stanford physicist Henry Stapp’s quantum approach to consciousness as Dr. Hawkins has described in the June 2003 lecture in Sedona, Arizona as well as in Appendix D in his book I: Reality and Subjectivity.
* * * *
The whole problem really started with light. In the late nineteenth century, James Clerk Maxwell discovered that light was nothing more than a chain of electric fields turning into magnetic fields, or electromagnetic waves. But around 1900, Max Planck (considered the father of quantum mechanics) discovered that light was made up of energy packets (i.e. particles). Albert Einstein furthered Planck’s work with his analysis of the photoelectric effect in 1905, demonstrating that light was indeed made up of tiny particles.
But how could light be both a particle and a wave? Viennese physicist Erwin Schrodinger hypothesized that electrons were nothing more than standing waves or vibrations. German physicist Max Born took this wave interpretation to the next level by saying that these waves are not real things; they’re probabilities.
As Zukav clearly explains:
[T]he Schrodinger wave equation governs the development in isolation of the observed system which is represented mathematically by a wave function. A wave function is a mathematical fiction that represents all the possibilities that can happen to an observed system when it interacts with an observing system (a measuring device).[2]
The logical absurdity of a wave function is often explained by Schrodinger’s famous thought experiment: A cat is placed in a closed box with a radioactive substance, giving the cat a 50/50 chance of survival after one hour. Until an observer opens the box to determine whether the cat is alive or dead, according to Schrodinger’s equation, the cat is said to be both dead and alive (and everything in between). Once the cat is observed, the wave function collapses into either a dead or alive cat. So according to many theorists, the collapse of the wave function creates our experiential reality; each collapse creates a change in reality. (We’ll come back to the wave function shortly.)
Skipping ahead again, we get to German physicist Werner Heisenberg’s famed uncertainty principle which basically states that you can either know a particle’s momentum or its position, but you can’t accurately measure both. In fact, the uncertainty principle says that any attempt to observe an electron alters the electron. Now we’re getting to the good stuff. Zukav illuminates:
This is the primary significance of the uncertainty principle. At the subatomic level, we cannot observe something without changing it. There is no such thing as the independent observer who can stand on the sidelines watching nature run its course without influencing it. [3]
Classical physics (also known as Newtonian Physics, named after Sir Isaac Newton) is based around the idea that the physical world is comprised of tiny bits of matter/energy that interact in definable, clearly measurable ways. This is the “mechanistic paradigm” discussed throughout this narrative; everything in the physical world has a causal relationship with everything else. In essence, the world is viewed as a machine, where each motion should have a calculatable outcome. This belief has been held about the cosmic interactions within the solar system, natural phenomena on our planet, and all the way down to the functioning of the human body or centuries. Within this paradigm, scientists perform experiments as an outside observer.
However, as physicist Henry Stapp points out, this Newtonian worldview is not accurate because the observer is an integral part of the system in which the research is being conducted:
Classical physics is merely an approximation to a more accurate theory called quantum mechanic and quantum mechanics says just the opposite. Quantum mechanics incorporates the casual effects of mental intentions upon physical systems, and explains how your mental effort causes your arm to rise. Quantum theory converts science’s picture of you from that of a mechanical automation to that of a mindful human person. The theory shows explicitly how the approximation [provided by] classical physics also completely eliminates all effects of your conscious thoughts upon your bodily actions.[4]
When you witness something, it changes. At the quantum level, the choices you make—your intention—shifts the probability of a potentiality. In fact, at the Copenhagen Solvay Conference in 1927, this was the conclusion that the founders of quantum mechanics made: the observer and that which is observed are inextricably linked and must not be viewed as separate. Physicist Henry Stapp explains:
Copenhagen quantum theory is about the relationships between human agents and systems that they act upon and observe. Thus that formulation separates the physical universe into two parts, which are described in two different languages. One part is the observing human agent and his measuring devices. That part is described in mental terms in terms of instructions to colleagues about how to set up the devices, and what we then “see,” or otherwise consciously experience. The other part is the system that the agent is acting upon. That part is described in physical terms in terms of numbers assigned to tiny space-time regions.[5]
Now, there are two choices pertinent to quantum theory. There is the Heisenberg Choice, where an observer chooses which question will be asked of Nature. This question will confine Nature to a finite vacuum, placing the observation within specific parameters. This choice is in contrast to the Dirac Choice (or Process), named after physicist Paul Dirac, which is the random choice on the part of Nature. As Stapp explains:
According to quantum theory, the Dirac Choice is a choice between alternatives that are specified by the Heisenberg Choice: the observer must first specify what aspect of the system he intends to measure or probe, and then put in place an instrument that will probe that aspect.[6]
This brings us to Hungarian mathematician John von Neumann who appears to have unknowingly offered a theoretical solution to the kinesiologic response in 1932 when he published The Mathematical Foundation of Quantum Mechanics. Aware of the determinations from the Copenhagen Conference, von Neumann applied his wizardry as a logician and mathematician to these new quantum distinctions.[7] The result was a reformulation of the theory which effectively incorporates both mind and body, observer and observed. He split the formulation into two simultaneously occurring processes: Process I and Process II. Process II represents the physical world, similar to what is observed in classical physics. Process I ties in the role of the observer—the human experience—which classical physics precluded. This process represents the effects on a physical world by the intentions of a human observer.
A particular action by a conscious observer will lead to one of two alternative feedback responses: “Yes” or “Not-Yes.” The “Yes” feedback response is experientially recognizable by the observer; the “Not-Yes” represents the fact that the “Yes” response did not take place. (The reader may begin to see the parallels between this mathematical explanation of quantum mechanics and the phenomena of kinesiology.)
Von Neumann’s formula for Process I (human experience) is as follows:
S -> PSP + (I-P)S(I-P)
(The following explanation will not require you to understand this formula.)
P represents the intention of the conscious observer and specifies the collection of “Yes” responses associated with a Process I action. The importance of P is that the intention of an already-preselected question is going to alter the response. Put another way, our conscious choice about what question to ask affects the system of which we are asking the question. S specifies the physical system upon which this action acts. The formula can also be written this way:
Process I = “Yes” or “Not-Yes”
According to this interpretation of quantum theory, each “Yes” represents a collapse of the wave function discussed above. But what’s causing the collapse of the wave function and the creation of reality? Consciousness itself.
This brings us to our theoretical understanding of kinesiology: When you test the viability of a given statement, you are determining whether or not the wave function will collapse.[8] Only something that is true has existence in reality.
Put simply, truth collapses the wave function. If you test a particular statement like “Today is Monday” and your arm (i.e. muscles) stays strong, a wave function collapsed, signifying that it is indeed Monday. Conversely, if you test weak (i.e. your arm drops to your side), there is no collapse of the wave function denoting that your statement was untruthful. Although it may seem counterintuitive, when your arm stays strong while testing a statement with kinesiology, a wave function collapses, but if your arms collapses (i.e. goes weak), there is no affect in reality.
From the perspective of Hawkins’ Scale of Consciousness, anything above the level of courage (200) collapses the wave function, whereas anything below 200 does not.
[1] See Diamond, John. Your Body Doesn’t Lie. New York: Warner Books, 1979.
[2] Zukav 73.
[3] Zukav 112.
[4] Stapp, Lucerne Lecture
[5] Stapp, Lucerne Lecture
[6] See Stapp, “Attention, Intention, and Will in Quantum Physics” (1999)
[7] “Von Newmann capitalized upon the key Copenhagen move of bringing human knowings into the theory of physical reality.” (The Mindful Universe, 57)
[8] Stapp quote that relates to AK (from p.13 on Attention, Intention): “In quantum theory it is the observer who both poses the question, and recognizes the answer. Without some way of specifying what the question is, the quantum rules will not work: the quantum process grinds to a halt.”
