I found it's curious that the state of mind of a practicing Zen Buddhist is akin to the state of a particle in a quantum superposition. Furthermore, there's also an interesting similarities between quantum effects and how some hierarchies are formed. I'd also recall that for quantum physicists, the idea that sometimes the future can affect the present (that is, that there's the oppositely directed time's arrow) is not at all new.
There were these two posts -
Hypothesis: Res Potentia and Res Extensa Linked By Measurement and
Is The Possible Ontologically Real? - by Stuart Kauffman on 13.7 Cosmos & Culture blog in 2012
where he argues that
'perhaps the "possible" is ontologically real and the world consists of two realms, "Possibles" and "Actuals."'
Ontologically real in this case means that the future can affect the present.
'
...in the famous double slit experiment yielding the famous interference
bands, that any single photon simultaneously possibly did and possibly
did not go through the left slit'
Let me remind you that the riddle here is that a single proton seems to 'know' that there's a second slit there; even if we assume that the proton passes through only one slit, it behaves as if it 'knows' that there's the second. Thus, if we accept the Kauffman's point of view that the photon in this case exists in the Possible, then its present state is determined not by its past but its future state.
'Possibles evade the Law of the Excluded Middle. So too does Feynman's
claim about the photon possibly going through the left slit and
simultaneously possibly not going through the left slit.'
Any impact on the particle, for example, by measurement, leads to the collapse of its wave function, as a result of which the state of uncertainty disappears.
Some believe that there's a problem here: if quantum superposition collapses to a fixed state, what happens to
all the other possible states? In other words, at first glance, there's
a loss of information then. But it looks like there's a satisfactory answer: the information in this case turns to the structure (to the ties, in Buddhist terminology) so when the wave function collapses, the particle becomes part of a larger system - see
here -
'
Because superposition becomes a shared property of the system and its
environment, we can’t any longer see the superposition just by looking
at the little part of that shared state corresponding to the original
system.'*
It's interesting that the mind of a practicing Zen Buddhist seems to have the same pattern: there's a state of mind when you're free from your past (which means that you have the freedom to choose), and you can have this state as long as you remain independent.** Here it's appropriate to recall that another name for the Possible is the Potential (and in this case it is also equivalent to independence.) The analogy can be continued: as for a particle in a quantum superposition, for Zen mind the Law of the Excluded Middle doesn't matter; and this state can collapse for the same reason: if you somehow lost independence. Therefore, I believe, quantum effects can explain
the work of any mind: it's just because very few can afford to be in quantum superposition, most can never realize how their minds work.
In the same way, it seems, can be explained the principles of the formation of hierarchies: the transition of independence (ie, the Potential) of the members to the structure of the hierarchy*** (the Actual.) Note that the formation of hierarchies
in this case means an increase in entropy since the collapse of a wave function = an increase in entropy. I've never heard of any pandits thinking about independence as the Potential; in particular, I've never heard that
economists somehow took into account
independence while describing human behavior, although mergers and associated with it the loss of independence by the players is a
universal pattern of development for almost any economic situation - is it so phantom what they lose?
Meanwhile, when it coms to political decisions, it's not uncommon that a
choice is made in favor of independence and sovereignty and to the detriment of economic
expediency. So at least among elites, the understanding that
independence is as real as economic benefit clearly exists. Think also about the fact that any large company at one time definitely overcame the temptation to give up its own project for the sake of short-term benefits.
Think also about this: when it comes to complex systems that exhibit some kind of order, everyone is inclined to look for a hierarchy at their base.
But, at least, the mind is not the case: it's based on parity - Freud was a genius when he guessed that at the core the psyche lies conflict, that is, parity - this can be the reason why the self remains so elusive to physiologists: it's as if nowhere and everywhere.
PS There is another idea that I've been wanting to share, and which I probably do in one of the following posts: it's about another similarity between two patterns that, on the one hand, is clearly evident, on the other, not noticed for some reasons.
--------------------------------------------------------
*As I understand it, the assumption that unrealized scenarios of the future turn into the structure makes it possible to avoid the need for the multiple universe theory.
**The choice in this case doesn't take place between all possible
states, but between the possibility to maintain one's independence and
the possibility to lose it.
***In other words, we can think of human hierarchies as vampires feeding on the potential of their members.
