85 86 1 PB PDF
85 86 1 PB PDF
85 86 1 PB PDF
Hu and Wu, Thinking outside the box: story of spin-mediated consciousness theory
When in the course of scientific endeavor, it becomes apparent that deeper truth exist, a
decent respect to Nature requires that such truths be explored. We hold these truths to be
scientifically approachable, that all forms of existence are interconnected, that they
possess certain fundamental and unalienable properties. That to describe this
interconnectedness and these properties, successive theories shall be constructed by
mankind, deriving their explanatory and predictive powers from the approximations of
laws of Nature. That whenever any theory becomes inadequate of these ends, it is the
duties of mankind to modify it or to abolish it, and to establish new ones, laying the
foundation on such principles and organizing the structures in such forms, as to mankind
shall seem most likely to reflect their understanding and knowledge of Nature.
In memory of Thomas Jefferson
Corresponding author:1Huping Hu, Ph.D., J.D., Biophysics Consulting Group, 25 Lubber Street, Stony Brook, NY
11790, USA. E-mail: [email protected]
Introduction
Quantum entanglement is ubiquitous, appears everywhere in the microscopic world (See,
e.g., Durt, 2004; Brooks, 2005) and under some circumstances manifests itself
macroscopically (Arnesen, et al, 2001; Ghost et al, 2003 & Julsgaard et al, 2001). Indeed, it is
currently the most intensely studied subject in physics. Further, speculations abound as to
its nature and implications (See, e.g., Clarke, 2004, Josephson, 1991 & Radin, 2004). There
are many general and technical papers written on the subject. So cutting to the chase, we
shall immediately outline our propositions on the subject and then discuss each in some
detail with references to existing literature whenever possible. Readers are advised that our
propositions are outside the mainstream physics. Later in this article, we shall recall our
journey into the field of consciousness studies and the inception and development of the
spin-mediated consciousness theory.
The following are our propositions about the ontological origin/nature, implications and
potential applications of quantum entanglement:
1. It originates from the primordial spin processes in non-spatial and non-temporal
pre-spacetime. It is the quantum “glue” holding once interacting quantum entities
together in pre-spacetime, implies genuine interconnectedness and inseparableness
of the said quantum entities and can be directly sensed and utilized by the entangled
quantum entities.
2. Thus, it affects chemical/biochemical reactions, other physical processes and micro-
and macroscopic properties of all forms of matters as already shown by some
authors in the latter case. It plays vital roles in many biological processes and
consciousness. It is the genuine cause of many so called anomalous effects (if they
do exist) in parapsychology, alternative medicine and other fields as some authors
have already suspected in some cases
3. Further, it can be harnessed, tamed and developed into revolutionary technologies
to serve the mankind in many areas such as health, medicine and even recreation
besides the already emerging fields of quantum computation and communications.
First, Hestenes showed that in the geometric picture for the Dirac electron the
zitterbewegung associated with the spin is responsible for all known quantum effects of said
electron and the imagery number i in the Dirac equation is said to be due to electronic spin
(See, e.g., Hestines, 1983).
Second, in Bohmian mechanics, the “quantum potential” is responsible for quantum
effects (Bohm and Hiley, 1993). Salesi and Recami (1998) have recently shown that said
potential is a pure consequence of “internal motion” associated with spin evidencing that the
quantum behavior be a direct consequence of the fundamental existence of spin. Esposito
(1999) has expanded this result by showing that “internal motion” is due to the spin of the
particle, whatever its value. Bogan (2002) has further expanded these results by deriving a
spin-dependent gauge transformation between the Hamilton-Jacobi equation of classical
mechanics and the time-dependent Shrödinger equation of quantum mechanics which is a
function of the quantum potential of Bohmian mechanics.
Third, spin is a unique quantum concept often being said to have no classical
counterpart (See Tomonaga, 1997). Unlike mass and charge that enter a dynamic equation as
arbitrary parameters, spin reveals itself through the structure of the relativistic quantum
equation for fermions that combines quantum mechanics with special relativity (Dirac, 1928).
Indeed, many models of elementary particles and even space-time itself are built with spinors
(Budinich, 2001; Penrose, 1960 & 1967). Pauli (1927) and Dirac (1928) were the first to use
spinors to describe the electron. Also, Kiehn (1999) showed that the absolute square of the
wave function could be interpreted as vorticity distribution of a viscous compressible fluid
that also indicates that spin is the process driving quantum mechanics.
Therefore, in view of the foregoing it could be said that the driving force behind the
evolution of Shrödinger equation is quantum spin and, since quantum entanglement arises
from the evolution of Shrödinger equation the said spin is the genuine cause of quantum
entanglement.
What do we mean by pre-spacetime? Pre-spacetime in this article means a non-spatial
and non-temporal domain but it is not associated with an extra-dimension in the usual sense
since there is no distance or time in such domain (See, Hu & Wu, 2002). We have argued
before that in a dualistic approach mind resides in this domain and unpaired nuclear and/or
electronic spins are its mind-pixels (id.). So pre-spacetime is a holistic domain located
outside spacetime but connected through quantum thread/channel to everywhere in
spacetime enabling quantum entanglement or Einstein’s “spooky action at a distance.” Aerts
(2004), Clarke (2004) and others have also expressed the non-space view of quantum
nonlocality.
Such a non-spatial and non-temporal pre-spacetime is a “world” beyond Einstein’s
relativistic world but does not contradict with the latter since the latter deals with classical
physical events occurring within spacetime. In contrast, quantum entanglement occurs within
non-spatial and non-temporal domain. Therefore, instantaneous signaling through quantum
entanglement in pre-spacetime is possible if the entangled quantum entities can directly
sense and/or utilize the entanglement.
Similarly, the therapeutic effect of a homeopathic remedy, if it truly exists beyond and
above the placebo effect, can be explained as the entanglement of the substances being
diluted out of existence through vigorous shaking/stirring with the diluting solvent and then
the subsequent entanglement of the solvent with the quantum entities involved in the
diseased biological and/or physiological processes and the effect of such entanglement on
the latter processes. Indeed, there are reports in the existing literature exploring the use of
generalized entanglement to explain the therapeutic ingredient in a homeopathic remedy
(See, e.g., Milgrom, 2002; Wallach, 2000 & Weingärtner, 2003).
Further, many other unconventional healing effects reported in alternative medicine, if
they are genuine, can be explained as the results of quantum entanglement between the
quantum entities involved in the diseased processes and the quantum entities in the healing
sources, such as a healthy biological entity, and the effect of the former on the latter
processes.
For yet another example, all the results from Princeton Engineering Anomalies
Research program over the last 26 years (Jahn & Dunne, 2005) can also be straightforwardly
explained as the entanglement of the quantum entities controlled by human mind with the
quantum entities responsible for the physical processes capable of producing modified
random results. By the same token, many if not all anomalous effects reported
parapsychology such as telepathy and those results reported by Grinberg- Zylberbaum
(1987) and the repeaters (For a summary, see, Wackermann, 2005) can be simply explained
as the results of quantum entanglement between the quantum entities capable of invoking
action potentials in one person and those in a second person and the effect of one on the
other through quantum entanglement. Grinberg-Zylberbaum himself speculated that his
results had something to do with quantum entanglement (1994).
human minds for legitimate purposes. Further, the said technologies can be used for
instantaneous communications with humans sent to the outer space.
Are we delusional? Only time will tell. But we are convinced that the wonders of
quantum entanglement technologies will be realized very soon and a new paradigm of
science will be born in the near future.
It was during the period of his Ph.D. studies Hu read some articles and papers in the
journal Nature about the mechanism of general anesthesia and came up with the ideas of
active oxygen transportations in cells which he discussed with Swartz and perturbation of
oxygen pathways being involved in general anesthesia which he only discussed with Wu
thinking the latter idea was too premature.
After obtaining his Ph.D., Hu then left science and went into business for a few years
from 1991 to 1993. After he failed at business, he applied and went to New York Law
School to study for his law degree from 1994 through 1997. While he was attending law
school in the evenings, he worked for the Bronx District Attorneys’ Office for a while and
then for a law firm located in Manhattan. Upon graduation from law school and admission
to the New York Bar in the spring of 1999, Hu went to Wall Street and worked at a few
Wall Street firms as a proprietary trader while practiced law on the side until 2003. After
Wall Street cooled down, Hu in 2004 set up his own law practice in Flushing, New York
and is currently a full-time practicing attorney.
In late 2000, Hu decided to search the Internet and see whether progress had been
made in field of general anesthesia when he got bored at trading stocks during the day. He
ran across a 1994 News Week article predicting that the mystery of general anesthesia
would be solved within five years. It was late 2000 and clearly that prediction utterly failed.
It was then Hu decided to further research his earlier idea of oxygen pathway perturbation
by general anesthetics and decided to write a paper on it after some ten years had pasted
since the idea first came to him. After the paper was written with Wu, Wu suggested to try
a journal called Medical Hypotheses that she had heard would publish novel ideas in
medicine and related areas. Hu tried and the paper was accepted and publishing in 2001 (Hu
& Wu, 2001). At about the same time, Hu ran across a physics e-print server called
xxx.lanl.gov and was able to load the paper on January 24, 2001 to that server by using
Wu’s academic affiliation with Mount Sinai School of Medicine.
Their anesthetic paper was entitled “Mechanism of anesthetic action; oxygen pathway
perturbation hypothesis” which basically says general anesthetics produce unconsciousness
by perturbing oxygen pathways in neural membranes and proteins (Hu & Wu, 2001). This
view is not at all accepted by the scientific community at large. Indeed, there are no
commonly accepted theory on how general anesthetics work, despite they have been in use
for more than 150 years.
After the anesthetic paper was published, Hu got very interested in solving the mystery
of consciousness and spent all his waking moments besides trading stocks thinking about the
problem. One late evening while brushing his teath and getting ready to go to bed, Hu
suddenly hit the idea that the unpaired nuclear spin and/or electron spins inside the
high-voltage neural membranes could be the key to the mystery of consciousness and
immedately told Wu about it and she agreed that it is a great candidate. Although Hu knew
the importance of the concept of quantum spin in physics for a long time and even
contemplated its roles in biology during his graduate school days, it was that night his
previous vague ideas get focued and crystalized. Thus, the spin-mediated conscousness
theory was born. It took the authors almost a year to put a preliminary paper together and
deposit the same on August 11, 2002 into the physics archive xxx.lanl.gov (Hu & Wu, 2002).
The initial reception to the theory by physicists through private e-mails was very
positive and encouraging, the same paper was also provisionally accepted for print
publication in November 2002 by a major consciousnes journal but was eventually rejected
in Janruary 2004 after two revisions and more than a year had passed. A more developed
version of the theory was presented in March 2003 at Quantum Mind 2003 and a further
developed version was published in Medical Hypotheses in mid 2004. Although published
reviews, criticisms or comments on this theory are negligible to non-existent, it is well
received at conferences and in private communications by some physicists and the like. Two
more papers on the same subject were also published in this electronic journal,
NeuroQuantology (Hu & Wu, 2004a; 2004c).
Briefly, the spin-mediated consciousness theory is a theory that says quantum spin is
the seat of consciousness and the linchpin between mind and the brain, that is, spin is the
mind-pixel (Hu & Wu, 2002, 2004a-d). According to this theory, consciousness is
intrinsically connected to the spin process and emerges from the self-referential collapses of
spin states and the unity of mind is achieved by entanglement of these mind-pixels (id.). It is
a tentative hypothesis as are all current hypotheses about consciousness.
The starting point is the fact that spin is basic quantum bit ("qubit") for encoding
information and, on the other hand, neural membranes and proteins are saturated with
nuclear spin carrying nuclei and form the matrice of brain electrical activities. Indeed, as
discussed above, spin is embedded in the microscopic structure of spacetime as reflected by
Dirac equation and is likely more fundamental than spacetime itself as implicated by Roger
Penrose’s work. In the Hestenes picture the zitterbewegung associated with spin was
shown to be responsible for the quantum effects of the fermion. Further, in the Bohm
picture the internal motion associated with spin has been shown to be responsible for the
quantum potential which, in turn, is responsible for quantum effects. Thus, if one adopts the
minority quantum mind view, nuclear spins and possibly unpaired electron spins become
natural candidates for mind-pixels (Hu & Wu, 2002; 2003; 2004a-d).
Applying these ideas to the particular structures and dynamics of the brain, the authors
theorize that human brain works as follows: Through action potential modulated nuclear
spin interactions and paramagnetic O2/NO driven activations, the nuclear spins inside
neural membranes and proteins form various entangled quantum states some of which
survive decoherence through quantum Zeno effects or in decoherence-free subspaces and
then collapse contextually via irreversible and non-computable means producing
consciousness and, in turn, the collective spin dynamics associated with said collapses have
effects through spin chemistry on classical neural activities thus influencing the neural
networks of the brain (Hu & Wu, 2002; 2003; 2004a-d). As with other quantum mind
theories, decoherence is a major concern as pointed out by Tegmark but may not be
insurmountable (See, e.g., Hameroff). We believe that the solution will be found through the
studies of quantum entanglement.
Existing literature supports the possibility of a spin-mediated consciousness. For
example, it was shown that proton nuclear spins in nematic liquid crystal can achieve
long-lived intra-molecular quantum coherence with entanglement in room temperature for
information storage (Khitrin et al, 2002). Long-ranged (>10 microns) intermolecular
multiple-quantum coherence in NMR spectroscopy was discovered about a decade ago
designs and implementations of computer simulations and experiments for the verifications
of the same. Important results shall be reported as soon as feasible.
Maoxin Wu is Hu’s collaborator, supporter and spouse of almost 20 years. She is currently
an assistant professor at Mount Sinai School of Medicine and Director of Fine Needle
Aspiration Services at the Department of Pathology, Mount Sinai Medical Center. She is a
board-certified pathologist and received her medical residency training at Long Island Jewish
Medical Center during 1996-1999 and was a fellow of cytopathology at said Center during
1999-2000. She received her M.D. from Shanxi Medical University, China, in 1984 and M.S.
and Ph.D. from University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana in 1990 and 1995 respectively.
References
Aerts D and Aerts S. Towards a general operational and realistic framework for quantum mechanics and
relativity theory. In Quo Vadis Quantum Mechanics? Ed. A. C. Elitzur et al. Berlin: Springer, 2004.
Arnesen MC, Bose S and Vedral V. Natural thermal and magnetic entanglement in the 1D Heisenberg model.
Phys Rev Lett 2001;87:017901/1-4.
Bohm D and Hiley BJ. The Undivided Universe. London: Routledge, 1993.
Bogan JR. Spin: the classical to quantum connection. arXiv quant-ph/0212110 (2002).
Brooks M. Entanglement: weirdest link. New Scientist 2005;818: 32.
Budinich P. From the geometry of pure spinors with their division algebra to fermions’s physics. arXiv
hep-th/0102049 (2001).
Chicurei M. Magnetic mind games. Nature 2002;417:114-116.
Clarke C. Quantum mechanics, consciousness and the self. in Science, Consciousness and Ultimate Reality, ed.
D. Lorimer (Exeter: Imprint Academic, 2004).
Davenas E. et al. Human basophil degranulation triggered by very dilute antiserum against IgE. Nature
1988;333:816-818.
Dirac PAM. The quantum theory of the electron. Proc R Soc 1928;A117:610-624.
Durt T. Quantum entanglement, interaction, and the classical limit. quant-ph/0401121 (2004).
Eberhard P. Bell's theorem and the different concepts of locality. Nuovo Cimento 1978;46B:392-419.
Einstein A, Podolsky B and Rosen N. Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered
complete? Phys Rev 1935;47:777-780.
Esposito S. On the role of spin in quantum mechanics. Found Phys Lett 1999;12:165.
Gershenfeld N and Chuang IL. Bulk spin resonance quantum computation. Science 1997;275: 350–356.
Ghosh S, Rosenbaum TF, Aeppli G and Coppersmith SN. Entangled quantum state of magnetic dipoles. Nature
2003;425:48-51.
Grinberg-Zylberbaum J and Ramos J. Patterns of interhemispheric correlation during human communication. Int’l
J Neurosci 1987;36:41–53.
Grinberg-Zylberbaum J. et al The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox in the brain: The transferred potential. Phys
Essays 1994;7:422–427.
Hameroff S and Penrose R. Conscious events as orchestrated spacetime selections. J Conscious Stud 1996;3:
36-53.
Hestenes D. Quantum mechanics from self-interaction. Found Physics 1983;15: 63-87.
Hu H and Wu M. Mechanism of anesthetic action: oxygen pathway perturbation hypothesis. Med Hypotheses
2001;57: 619-627.
Hu H and Wu M. Spin-mediated consciousness theory: possible roles of oxygen unpaired electronic spins and
neural membrane nuclear spin ensemble in memory and consciousness. arXiv quant-ph/0208068 (2002).
Hu H and Wu M. Spin as primordial self-referential process driving quantum mechanics, spacetime dynamics and
consciousness Cogprints ID3544 (2003); NeuroQuantology 2004a;2:41-49.
Hu H and Wu M. Spin-mediated consciousness theory: possible roles of neural membrane nuclear spin
ensembles and paramagnetic oxygen. Med Hypotheses 2004b;63: 633-646.
Hu H and Wu M. Action potential modulation of neural spin networks suggests possible role of spin in memory
and consciousness NeuroQuantology 2004c;2:309-317.
Hu H and Wu M. Possible roles of neural electron spin networks in memory and consciousness. Cogprints
ID3544 (2004d).
Jahn RG and Dunne BJ. The PEAR proposition. J Sci Exploration 2005;19:195–245.
Josephson BD and Pallikari-Viras F. Biological utilisation of quantum nonlocality. Found Phys 1991;21:197-207.
Julsgaard B, Kozhekin A and Polzik ES. Experimentally long-lived entanglement of two macroscopic objects.
Nature 2001;413: 400–403.
Kiehn RM. An extension to Bohm’s quantum theory to include non-gradient potentials and the production of
nanometer vortices. http://www22.pair.com/csdc/pdf/bohmplus.pdf (1999).
Khitrin AK, Ermakov VL and Fung BM. NMR molecular photography. J Chem Phys 2002;117: 6903-6906.
Milgrom LR. Patient-practitioner-remedy (PPR) entanglement. Homeophathy 2002;91:239-248.
Pauli W. Zur quantenmechanik des magnetischen electrons. Z Phys 1927;43: 601-623.
Penrose R. A spinor approach to general relativity. Ann Phys 1960;10: 171.
Penrose R. Twistor algebra. J Math Phys 1967;8:345.
Radin D. Entangled minds Shift 2004;5:10–14.
Rey L. Thermoluminescence of ultra-high dilutions of lithium chloride and sodium chloride. Physica A 2003; 323:
67-74.
Salesi G and Recami E. Hydrodynamics of spinning particles. Phys Rev A 1998;57: 98.
Schrödinger E. Discussion of probability relations between separated systems. Proc Cambridge Philos Soc
1935;31: 555.
Stapp HE. Mind, Matter and Quantum Mechanics. Found Phys 1982;12:363-99.
Tegmark M. The importance of quantum decoherence in brain processes. Phys Rev 2000;61E: 4194.
Tomonaga S. The Story of Spin. Chicago: The Univ. Press of Chicago, 1997.
Wackermann J. Dyadic correlations between brain functional states: present facts and future perspectives. Mind
and Matter 2005;2:105-122.
Walach H. Magic of signs: a non-local interpretation of homeopathy. Homeopathy 2000;89:127-140.
Walker EH. Consciousness and Quantum Theory. Psychic Exploration, Ed. J. White, 544-68. Putnam's, New
York, 1974.
Warren WS et al. Generation of impossible correlation peaks between bulk water and biomolecules in solution
NMR. Science 1993;262:2005.
Weingärtner O. What is the therapeutically active ingredient of homeopathic potencies? Homeopathy 2003;92:
145-151.