# Mind and Matter VII Quantum Physics V Mind over Matter V.

## Presentation on theme: "Mind and Matter VII Quantum Physics V Mind over Matter V."— Presentation transcript:

Mind and Matter VII Quantum Physics V Mind over Matter V

Topics for today Quantum Physics V – Schrödinger’s cat Mind over Matter V – Phenomena related to MPD and dissociative disorders 2

Topics for today Quantum Physics V – Schrödinger’s cat Mind over Matter V – Phenomena related to MPD and dissociative disorders 3

The context for Schrödinger’s cat (thought experiment) By 1935.. – The basic form of quantum mechanics was clear – Schrödinger’s equation was the accepted equation of motion Required on the small scale – For the large-scale the earlier (“classical”) physics was used But was recognized as only an approximation – Good enough most of the time – Easier to use Heisenberg: objects like atoms are not real – They’re just “potentialities” 4

Quantum mechanics and things larger than atoms Heisenberg: objects like atoms are just “potentialities” Things that are combinations of atoms – are therefore combinations of “potentialities” – So they too must be just “potentialities” Chairs? Tables? Cats and dogs? Planets and stars and galaxies? Schrödinger came up with a thought experiment – To demonstrate just how weird quantum mechanics is – Or at least, how weird it is under Heisenberg’s proposal, Which is consistent with Schrödinger’s equation 5

Wave function trapped in two boxes 6 Rosenblum & Kuttner, Quantum Enigma (2011), p. 96 3 2 1

Wave function of an atom trapped in two boxes Half of its “waviness” is in each of the two boxes It is in a ”superposition” state It does not exist in one box until an observer finds the whole atom in one of the boxes Upon looking into one box – The superposition-state waviness collapses – Into one box – The whole atom, as particle, is now in the observed box Or, if not there, it is in the other box But: Before looking into one box, – You could have chosen instead to produce an interference pattern – Demonstrating that it was a wave and in both boxes simultaneously 7 Review

Now let us add something to one of the boxes (of course we have to enlarge the box) A Geiger counter – will detect the presence of an atom – And will “fire” if an atom is detected A lever to pull the cork from a bottle of hydrogen cyanide – This lever is connected to the Geiger counter – is moved when/if it fires, releasing the cork A cat – Will be killed by the cyanide if it is released Schrödinger: – A ”hellish contraption” – Not intended to actually be built or used 8

Schrödinger’s Cat – Diagram 9 Rosenblum & Kuttner, Quantum Enigma (2011), p. 146

Schrödinger’s cat Half of the waviness of the atom has gone into each box As long as no observation is made.. – The atom is in a superposition state – It is in both boxes simultaneously (as a wave function) Therefore the whole system is in a superposition state – The Geiger counter is both fired and unfired – The cork on the cyanide bottle is both pulled and unpulled – The cat is both dead and alive 10

Schrödinger’s cat (cont’d) 11 The entire system would [contain] equal parts of living and dead cat. —Erwin Schrödinger

Stephen Hawking’s comment When I hear about Schrödinger’s cat, I reach for my gun. —Stephen Hawking 12

Wanted Poster 13

Quantum strangeness – Dilbert (Scott Adams, 2014) 14

Quantum strangeness – Dilbert (Scott Adams, 2014) 15

Topics for today Quantum Physics V – Schrödinger’s cat Mind over Matter V – Phenomena related to MPD and dissociative disorders 16

Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD) a.k.a. dissociative identity disorder (DID) “a large body of credible evidence…demonstrates that additional ‘cognitive systems,’ psychological entities indistinguishable from full-fledged conscious minds or personalities as we normally understand these terms, can sometimes occupy the same organism simultaneously, carrying on their varied existences as it were in parallel, and largely outside the awareness of the primary, everyday consciousness.” —Edward Kelly (2007: 36) 17

Literature on Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD) Early reports by – F. W. H. Myers – Wm. James – F. C. S. Schiller Many other reports, from 19 th century to present Famous case: – Thigpen & Cleckley, The Three Faces of Eve (1957) Enormous literature from 20 th century 18

F.C.S. Schiller’s brother F. C. S. Schiller (1864-1937) – A well-known philosopher – Born in Germany, studied at Oxford, taught at Cornell, Oxford (30 yrs), and USC His brother produced “automatic writing” – Went on continuously while he was fully and consciously engaged in some other activity such as reading a book or telling a story – Sometimes wrote simultaneously with both hands and on completely different subjects One or the other stream of writing was sometimes in mirror-image form 19

The case of Anna Winsor Described by Wm. James and by F. W. H. Myers Anna lost control of her right arm – It was taken over by a distinctive secondary personality – Called “Old Stump” by Anna Right arm would write or draw – while Anna was occupied with other matters – Even sometimes while Anna was asleep Sometimes in total darkness The secondary personality manifested knowledge and skills which Anna herself did not possess 20

The Three Faces of “EVE” (Thigpen and Cleckley, 1957) Two major personalities, “Eve Black” and “Eve White” – Eve White was judged to be the original personality Allergy in one of the two personalities – Eve Black had allergic reaction to nylon stockings – Eve White did not 21

Physiological difference among personalities in same body Reported “in virtually every organ of body” (Coons, 1988) Examples: – Anesthesia in one personality but not others (Braun, 1983) – Different personalities speaking with different accents (Coons, 1988) – Differences in handwriting in different personalities (Coons, 1988) – Deafness in one personality but not others (Coons, 1988) – One personality right-handed, the other left-handed In one study, 37 out of 100 subjects (Putnam et al., 1986) 22

Difference in allergies and response to medication  Case 1: One personality could eat oranges normally - all the other personalities were allergic to citrus  Case 2: One personality was allergic to cats - the other was not  Case 3: One personality was allergic to smoke - the other was not A survey of 100 different cases (F. W. Putnam et al. 1986) – 35 involved alter personalities that responded differently to foods – In almost 50%, different responses to medications Example: a woman with adult-onset diabetes – “required different amounts of insulin depending on which personality was in control” (B. G. Braun, 1983) 23

Difference in addiction A woman with M.P.D. (Coons, 1988; Miller & Triggiano, 1992) – One personality addicted to heroin – The other personalities had no addiction and did not exhibit withdrawal symptoms When the addicted personality “took over”, needle track marks would develop in the arms 24

Differences in visual acuity An early report (Dufay 1876, Alvarado 1989) – A woman with severe myopia requiring glasses – When in somnambulistic state had excellent vision without glasses Could do needlework and thread needles in dim light 25

Ocular differences: “Eve” “Eve” – differences in strabismus – Strabismus: the two eyes move in different directions and/or at different speeds – Study of film recordings (Condon, Ogston & Pacoe, 1969) – Each of the three personalities exhibited strabismus But with differences of detail The “least stable personality” showed by far the largest number of divergent movements The personality which later became the dominant one showed very few 26

Other differences in vision A color-blind patient with MPD (B. G. Braun, 1983) – Color-blindness “documented by the isochromatic color-blindness test” – The color-blindness disappeared after successful integration of the personalities Optical differences between different personalities – A patient with two personalities (Birnbaum & Thomann, 1996) – Required different corrective lenses for the different personalities – Differences in corneal curvature – Differences in astygmatism 27

Optical differences: E xperimental studies Examination of seven MPD patients (Shepard & Braun 1985, S. D. Miller 1989) – “clinically significant optical differences between alter personalities” on six measures Visual acuity Manifest retraction Color vision Pupil size Corneal curvature Intraocular pressure Replication of Shepard & Braun study (S. D. Miller, 1991) – 20 MPD patients – Similar results 28

Unusual ocular differences (S. D. Miller, 1991 ) Case I: Accommodative-type esotropia in one personality – Involves rotation of eyes, sometimes appears in 4-5-year-old children – Observed in one personality of one patient – This personality was four years old Case II: a patient with one adult and two child personalities – The adult personality showed presbyopia Deterioration of ability to adjust thickness and curvature of the lens – The two child personalities showed no signs of presbyopia 29

Difference in visual acuity (S. D. Miller, 1991 ) A patient with two personalities – First personality: 20/15 visual acuity in both eyes – Second personality 20/30 in one eye, 20/50 in the other – And an outward rotation of the left eye 30

When Data Meets Theory Two major areas of Data-Theory Conflict Quantum Mechanics – Many theories have been proposed, none widely accepted "Anyone not shocked by quantum mechanics has not yet understood it." Niels Bohr "Nobody understands quantum mechanics." Richard Feynman Mind and Body – The data are in conflict with the theory that processes and conditions of the body have physical origins 31

When Data Meets Theory (II) The two problem areas related The data is in conflict with the Newtonian world view The world as purely physical and mechanistic Stemming from the work of Isaac Newton 32 Isaac Newton (1642-1727)

Comment One gets the idea that we are missing something fundamental in our understanding of the universe. —Alex, of Indiana, posted to NYTIMES.COM (Science Times, 3 June 2014) 33

34 T h a n k s f o r y o u r a t t e n t i o n !

Download ppt "Mind and Matter VII Quantum Physics V Mind over Matter V."

Similar presentations