368
M. Svrˇ cek
15 Matter-Mind Dualism
We start with a short recapitulation of the megascopic mirrors of the microscopic
quantum concepts and associated rules as they were introduced in Sect. 13.
1. The first complementarity versus the second: while microscopic quantum theory
is based on Bohr’s complementarity between the mechanical (particle) and field
(wave) picture of elementary entities, megascopic quantum theory is founded
on two megascopic complementary accounts of the whole Universe, namely
the mechanical description representing its total wholeness, and the field formulation representing its total fragmentation. The implementation of a second
complementarity was for first time requested by Jordan.
2. Causality versus teleology: microscopic quantum physics inherits causality (or
upward causality) from classical physics due to Bohr’s correspondence principle. Its megascopic mirror is teleology (downward causation or the final cause),
mentioned already for first time by Maxwell, see Sect. 7, as it proceeds from
a principle that is extra physical, but not extra natural, and is acting without
exerting any force or spending any energy.
3. Projections versus injections: transitions between different states in microscopic
quantum physics are expressed as vector projections in Hilbert space. The
megascopic mirror of these projections is represented by injections, the latter
responsible for the transitions from the fragmented Universe into its wholeness
and vice versa. It was proposed for the first time by Bohm.
4. The Born rule versus the einselection rule: The probability of transitions based
on microscopic projections is calculated by means of Born’s law. Its megascopic
mirror is the einselection rule, which takes into account the influence of all
environments. The concept of einselection was originally coined by Zurek in his
quantum decoherence program with the aim to replace the Born rule. As we have
shown in Sect. 7, it cannot be replaced, and in Sect. 13 we also revealed the true
meaning of einselection as the megascopic counterpart of the microscopic Born
rule. It means that the latter remains to be tied to the microscopic projections,
while the einselection principle determines the probabilities of the megascopic
injection transitions.
The above mentioned four concepts and rules form, in the microscopic world, the
basic axioms of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics. But one axiom
is still missing, i.e. the von Neumann–Wigner rule. At this point we have reached a
very important but most commanding point: What is its megascopic mirror? Before
we try to respond to this challenge, one must first deliberate more deeply on the
problem of the matter-mind dualism that is necessary for the understanding of the
von Neumann–Wigner rule. The matter-mind dualism had a most significant historical development after the Cartesian split. Heisenberg paid special attention to
this problem in the Chapter 5 entitled “Die Entwicklung der philosophischen Ideen
seit Descartes im Vergleich zu der neuen Lage in der Quantentheorie” in his book
“Physik und Philosophie”. Quoting directly the original version in German [153]:
M. Svrˇ cek
15 Matter-Mind Dualism
We start with a short recapitulation of the megascopic mirrors of the microscopic
quantum concepts and associated rules as they were introduced in Sect. 13.
1. The first complementarity versus the second: while microscopic quantum theory
is based on Bohr’s complementarity between the mechanical (particle) and field
(wave) picture of elementary entities, megascopic quantum theory is founded
on two megascopic complementary accounts of the whole Universe, namely
the mechanical description representing its total wholeness, and the field formulation representing its total fragmentation. The implementation of a second
complementarity was for first time requested by Jordan.
2. Causality versus teleology: microscopic quantum physics inherits causality (or
upward causality) from classical physics due to Bohr’s correspondence principle. Its megascopic mirror is teleology (downward causation or the final cause),
mentioned already for first time by Maxwell, see Sect. 7, as it proceeds from
a principle that is extra physical, but not extra natural, and is acting without
exerting any force or spending any energy.
3. Projections versus injections: transitions between different states in microscopic
quantum physics are expressed as vector projections in Hilbert space. The
megascopic mirror of these projections is represented by injections, the latter
responsible for the transitions from the fragmented Universe into its wholeness
and vice versa. It was proposed for the first time by Bohm.
4. The Born rule versus the einselection rule: The probability of transitions based
on microscopic projections is calculated by means of Born’s law. Its megascopic
mirror is the einselection rule, which takes into account the influence of all
environments. The concept of einselection was originally coined by Zurek in his
quantum decoherence program with the aim to replace the Born rule. As we have
shown in Sect. 7, it cannot be replaced, and in Sect. 13 we also revealed the true
meaning of einselection as the megascopic counterpart of the microscopic Born
rule. It means that the latter remains to be tied to the microscopic projections,
while the einselection principle determines the probabilities of the megascopic
injection transitions.
The above mentioned four concepts and rules form, in the microscopic world, the
basic axioms of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics. But one axiom
is still missing, i.e. the von Neumann–Wigner rule. At this point we have reached a
very important but most commanding point: What is its megascopic mirror? Before
we try to respond to this challenge, one must first deliberate more deeply on the
problem of the matter-mind dualism that is necessary for the understanding of the
von Neumann–Wigner rule. The matter-mind dualism had a most significant historical development after the Cartesian split. Heisenberg paid special attention to
this problem in the Chapter 5 entitled “Die Entwicklung der philosophischen Ideen
seit Descartes im Vergleich zu der neuen Lage in der Quantentheorie” in his book
“Physik und Philosophie”. Quoting directly the original version in German [153]: