A Matter of Probability...

When we drill down into the subatomic world, where quantum theory has its most dramatic implications, uncertainty reigns. At that scale, it is difficult to describe particles as things, but more as probabilities. Science cannot say with certainty where a particle will be. What it can do is predict the odds the particle will exist in various places in what ends up being a probability pattern or wave.

We can look back to the words of noted atomic physicist, Robert Oppenheimer...

"If we ask, for instance, whether the position of the electron remains the same, we must say 'no'; if we ask whether the electron's position changes with time, we must say 'no'; if we ask whether the electron is at rest, we must say 'no'; if we ask whether it is in motion, we must say 'no'."

J.R.Oppenheimer, Science and the Common Understanding (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1954), pp. 42-43

This inability to predict exactly how a particle will behave gives rise to the common misconception that its nature is random. In physics, this unpredictableness is associated with the complementary nature of specific properties as spelled out in Werner Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle.

An extension of this may well be the polar nature of quantum awareness and quantum presence as I have laid out... with free will being implicated in the unpredictableness.

Quantum Speaking...

The word quantum is derived from the Latin "quantus", meaning quantity, or "how much". In physics it refers to a smallest unit of action or process associated with a discrete subatomic event.

Max Planck, an early influencer of quantum theory, used the term to describe the quantization of phenomenon occurring to particles such as electrons and photons. Contrary to the smooth continuous motion of classical physics, Planck observed that the orbit of an electron would "jump" when transitioning from one energy level to another without every falling in intermediate space. Hence the phrase "quantum leap".

Therefore, quanta are not divisible. Not enough energy means no transition, and all transitions occur abruptly in these discrete units. In the formulization of quantum theory, quantized physical properties are aptly derived from "Planck's constant".

This gives rise to my notion that the complementary "I" is not a concrete presence in space and time, but manifests abruptly as awareness resolves to presence.

Living in a material world?...

Since 1905, it became apparent to physicists that this may not be so. That is when Albert Einstein published his theory of special relativity. In it, underlying matter was energy; formulated as E=mc².

"Relativity theory has had a profound influence on our picture of matter by forcing us to modify our concept of a particle in an essential way. In classical physics, the mass of an object had always been associated with an indestructible material substance, with some 'stuff' of which all things were thought to be made. Relativity theory showed that mass has nothing to do with substance, but is a form of energy. Energy, however, is a dynamic quantity associated with activity, or with processes. The fact that the mass of a particle is equivalent to a certain amount of energy means that the particle can no longer be seen as a static object, but has to be conceived as a dynamic pattern, a process involving the energy which manifests itself as the particle's mass."

Fritjof Capra, The Tao of Physics (Boston: Shambhala, 2000), p. 77

It seems physics may agree that we live in a world of process.

Continuity...

It may be that concerns over "emptiness of self" and "continuity" are linked. We seem to be missing an anchor.

I'm drawn to the former as I believe it dispels the notion that we are somehow already there and then have these experiences. Often expressed as the Cartesian duality. That the material self and the mind are something else.

I am attempting to probe the depths of the notion that awareness (consciousness) and presence (being) are poles of a complementarity. Think of the Chinese Yin/Yang. That perhaps the “I” we relate to is a single quantum within physics. That when this quantum is an awareness experiencing, it is not a concrete presence in space and time. It is not a being, simply because it is a becoming. Once it has experienced, once it has become, the pole swings the other way, and it is no longer conscious, it simply exists as an instance in space and time.

Taken another way...I am speculating upon a serial process in which when “I” am conscious, no one else is, for others exist in that moment as objects of my awareness. That when another is conscious, the rest of us are not, and so on, and so-forth. Until finally we come full circle and the cycle repeats, with fresh content for each succeeding awareness to contemplate.

So the "emptiness of self" to me relates to what I see as a lack of something concrete. Perhaps the only thing fixed is history. The process itself, of experiencing and being experienced, is the true anchor. "Continuity" lies within this enduring process.

"No Thinker Thinks Twice" - Alfred North Whitehead

Cognitive Science...

This idea of self-supporting experience without a material self has even been embraced by some within the field of Cognitive Science. There, the formulation of the term "enaction" signifies "embodied action", or perceptually guided action. Thus, in dealing with the transitory phases of an experience...

"This arising and subsiding, emergence and decay, is just that emptiness of self in the aggregates of experience. In other words, the very fact that the aggregates are full of experience is the same as the fact that they are empty of self. If there were a solid, really existing self hidden in or behind the aggregates, its unchangeableness would prevent any experience from occurring; its static nature would make the constant arising and subsiding of experience come to a screeching halt. But the circle of arising and decay of experience turns continuously, and it can do so only because it is empty of a self."

Francisco J. Varela, Evan Thompson, Eleanor Rosch, The Embodied Mind (Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1993), p. 80.

Process and Fallacy...

Process Philosophy, as explained in Alfred North Whitehead's Process and Reality, theorizes that the fundamental elements of the universe are occasions of experience. The material world is merely a succession of occasions of experience. In fact, Whitehead coined the phrase "Fallacy of Misplaced Concreteness" to denote thinking something is a concrete reality when in fact it is merely a concept about the way things are.

Within Process Philosophy, all experiences are influenced by backward facing poles of preceding experiences and have forward facing poles that will influence future experiences. An occasion of experience consists of a process of "prehending" (Whitehead's term) past experiences and then reacting to them. The reaction is in the form of a choice the occasion of experience makes, essentially Free Will.

The complementary "I" is remarkably similar in nature to Whitehead's "occasions of experience". Moreover, interpenetration lays a foundation for the "prehending”, which is grasping or taking hold of, the antecedent environment.

The Homunculus...

Cooperation evolves to such a degree in this symbiotic relationship that we look for a homunculus in the brain. Yet none has been found. What has been found is a vast chaotic looking network of neurons firing.

"In chaotic systems, very minute changes in initial conditions grow exponentially into large differences in final outcome, a phenomenon called "sensitivity to initial conditions". The ubiquity of chaotic systems in nature is now widely recognized, and there is growing interest in the chaotic behavior of the brain at many levels, from the transmission of impulses along individual nerve fibers, to the functioning of neural networks, to general patterns of brain waves".

Robert Kane, The Significance of Free Will (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998), pp. 129.

Hence, a single collapsing quantum probability can guide a network, you.

The Stream on Consciousness...

How can the complementary "I" as I posit manifest as a stream of consciousness across probabilities? Are other potential I's within the network of like associated interpenetrations inferior and disregarded? Are they superior, but yielding?

I believe the answer lies in cooperation, as in mutualism of a symbiotic relationship. As experimentally established, quanta can "feel" each other and in essence coordinate their reaction. Consciousness tends to stay on a thread of reflective thought, but subconscious processes, through interpenetration, may intervene. Subconscious processes themselves tend to stay on a thread of sensual experience, but conscious may intervene.

Cooperation occurs over time (i.e. maturity). This isn't always the case (i.e. neurological disorders). But generally, there are times when subconscious yields so conscious can sense and consciousness yields so subconscious can reflect.

Interconnectedness...

Still, David Bohm was able to elaborate much about the interconnectedness of reality. Bohm and a research student named Yakir Aharonov discovered yet another example within Quantum Mechanics. Under certain conditions, electrons appeared able to "feel" the presence of a nearby magnetic field even though they were traveling in a region of space where the field strength is zero. This phenomenon became known as the Aharonov-Bohm effect.

Another Departure...

Bohm was never satisfied with the "spooky action at a distance" of the dominant Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory. Rather, he opted to extend Louis de Broglie's pilot-wave theory. To that end he focused on hidden variables which were experimentally inaccessible, such as the "quantum potential", to negate the Uncertainty Principle and render Quantum Mechanics into a deterministic theory.

Yet in my interpretation, the Uncertainty Principle might very well be a corollary of Free Will.

The Holographic Universe...

Michael Talbot wrote The Holographic Universe based on one of Bohm's prominent theories. However, the hologram leaves us viewing reality as a projection. I prefer to view it rather as a matter of perspective.

Yet we share these viewpoints...

"...Bohm believes that our almost universal tendency to fragment the world and ignore the dynamic interconnectedness of all things is responsible for many of our problems, not only in science but in our lives and our society as well."

"...he feels it has no meaning to speak of consciousness and matter as interacting. In a sense, the observer is the observed."

Bohm’s Analogy...

“Imagine a fish swimming in an aquarium. Imagine also that you have never seen a fish or an aquarium before and your only knowledge about them comes from two television cameras' one directed at the aquarium's front and the other at its side. When you look at the two television monitors you might mistakenly assume that the fish on the screens are separate entities. After all, because the cameras are set at different angles, each of the images will be slightly different. But as you continue to watch you will eventually realize there is a relationship between the two fish. When one turns, the other makes a slightly different but corresponding turn. When one faces the front, the other faces the side, and so on. If you are unaware of the full scope of the situation, you might wrongly conclude that the fish are instantaneously communicating with one another, but this is not the case. No communication is taking place because at a deeper level of reality, the reality of the aquarium, the two fish are actually one and the same”. - David Bohm (Quantum Physicist)

One. It's just a matter of perspective.

Thoughts...

“…the universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a machine. Mind no longer appears to be an accidental intruder into the realm of matter...we ought rather hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter.” - Sir James Jeans (Astrophysicist)

Thoughts intermingling with other thoughts.

No thought is complete or fully comprehended until it is expressed.

Free Will...

Through the breadth of interpenetration we, the universe, all, are one entity, just different perspectives.

Our individual free will is experienced as a collapsing quantum indeterminacy within the whole.

"...I mentioned two unsolved cosmological enigmas deeply implicated in free will, the problem of consciousness and of indeterminacy in nature. I think that a full understanding of how actions outflow from agents would require a better understanding of these problems, and it may be that both the unity of conscious experience and the unity of the self-network are somehow related to the quantum character of reality, as various scientists and philosophers have suggested".

Robert Kane, The Significance of Free Will (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998), pp. 195.

Merging...

The wealth of this unnamable complementary "I" is a function of a vast network of like associated interpenetrations, say within the brain. The "I" manifests simply as the leading perspective of a greater whole. Aware of the whole through interpenetration at one end of the complementary spectrum. A specific guiding quantum within the whole at the other end.

"The unnamable is the eternally real". [01]

[01] Stephen Mitchell, Tao Te Ching (New York: HarperPerennial, 1992)

In other words...

The "I" in ourselves emerges from the complementary nature of presence-awareness, being-nonbeing, space-time, and particle-wave. We are truly no particular thing. But rather the unnamable, vaguely graspable process of oscillating between complementary poles.

In essence, awareness experiences presence reacting to awareness.

Awareness is attracted to the experiential probabilities (quantum speaking) of presence, such as brain states, and responds in kind by collapsing a quantum indeterminacy within the brain.

Physics meets Philosophy.

Complementarity in Philosophy...

In Hinduism, "Neti Neti" roughly translated means "neither this, nor that". No-thing. The nature of the divine.

In Taoism...
"Being and Non-Being create each other."[02]
"We work with being, but non-being is what we use."[11]

Could it be that presence-awareness are complementary?

Stephen Mitchell, Tao Te Ching (New York: HarperPerennial, 1992) [02] [11]

Complementarity in Physics...

The most referenced example of complementarity involves the particle-wave aspects of a quantum of light as demonstrated by the two-slit experiment. Unless measured, the quantum will materialize in a wave pattern. But when measured, it reflects attributes of a particle. The simple act of measurement affects the results.

Both particle and wave aspects constitute valid views while only one applies in a given situation.

In a sense, the same is true with matter-energy under Einstein’s theory of special relativity, and space-time under Einstein’s theory of general relativity.