What is the cause of Probability amplitudes,coeffecients and wave function collapse in quantum mechanics...? I tend to think quantum mechanics is an emergent phenomenon...gaze from what ?...mmmm... consciousness!... I mean wave function collapse is not consciousness but a manifestation of consciousness.

What do you think about that?

Probability Amplitudes are an interpretation of wave function information, and are complex valued numbers which, when squared and MOD, represent the actual probability of an event.
Similarly, Wave Function collapse is interpreted as the mathematical process of extracting information from the wave function by applying an operator, which usually corresponds to an observable. The resultant eigenvalue generally corresponds to a new state.

No one ( except kooks and cranks ) ever involve consciousness in the discussion.

8 minutes ago, MigL said:

No one ( except kooks and cranks ) ever involve consciousness in the discussion.

So narrow minded... I just did it and am not what your have referred to above.

9 minutes ago, MigL said:

Probability Amplitudes are an interpretation of wave function information

Can you provide clarification of what you mean...like how?

11 minutes ago, MigL said:

Wave Function collapse is interpreted as the mathematical process of extracting information from the wave function

a mathematical process how? Wave function collapse just happened.

Easy way is to consider a classic example if you determine some probability function for simplicity lets just use coin tosses but dropping a collection of coins in a given time frame.

This forms a time or time independent wavefunction depending on drop rate.

Once you make measurements ie number of coins with heads up as opposed to heads down. The original wavefunction isn't needed you have made determinations through observation and measurement you now have a determined wavefunction as opposed to a probability wave function.

Some often refer to the latter as simply waveform to avoid confusion with the probability characteristic of a wavefunction.

2 hours ago, MJ kihara said:

What is the cause of Probability amplitudes,coeffecients and wave function collapse in quantum mechanics...? I tend to think quantum mechanics is an emergent phenomenon...gaze from what ?...mmmm... consciousness!... I mean wave function collapse is not consciousness but a manifestation of consciousness.

What do you think about that?

There is nothing in QM to suggest observation by a conscious or intelligent observer has anything to do with it. The popular misconception to the contrary is a result of the language used by the developers of the theory in the early days, which talked in terms of observable properties and hence of observers making observations. Pauli, for one, made it clear that “observation” referred just to interaction with the inanimate measuring apparatus employed in the measurement.

2 hours ago, MJ kihara said:

I mean wave function collapse is not consciousness but a manifestation of consciousness.

What evidence do you have to support the idea?

QM did not apply before life existed?

1 hour ago, MJ kihara said:

a mathematical process how? Wave function collapse just happened

Wave functions are how we describe QM. They do not physically exist.

34 minutes ago, swansont said:

Wave functions are how we describe QM. They do not physically exist.

Bingo the one point all the crackpots miss lmao. Not stating anyone here is one lol.

Edited February 13Feb 13 by Mordred

1 hour ago, Mordred said:

Once you make measurements ie number of coins with heads up as opposed to heads down. The original wavefunction isn't needed you have made determinations through observation and measurement you now have a determined wavefunction as opposed to a probability wave function.

I considered this approach while self learning about QM wave function and it led to a lot of confusion in my head...I could not get the essence of wave function collapse...until I came across a good explanation based on inner product and the importance of orthogonality.

34 minutes ago, exchemist said:

There is nothing in QM to suggest observation by a conscious or intelligent observer has anything to do with it.

Do this simple thing,it may help you get my approach...it's not the observer (EXTERNAL)making measurements.. whatever...it's we interacting with the observer (INTERNAL)...in this case the definition observer need to be considered carefully...of course observable properties I consider them as conclusions.

38 minutes ago, swansont said:

What evidence do you have to support the idea?

Once you make measurements wave function collapse occurs and then quantum state evolves...the highest probability outcome is highly considered however an outcome of the lowest probability can still occur...the process is purely random however the process has a freedom go give out it's output...to us 'the observer' outcome...we have to wait for measurements result...however the process seem to have the freedom to throw wherever it wants to us but within the expected result.

49 minutes ago, swansont said:

QM did not apply before life existed?

Really?

We are the new comers,consciousness has always been there,according to my thinking .

52 minutes ago, swansont said:

Wave functions are how we describe QM. They do not physically exist.

We don't have a choice ...we stumbled on that best explanation,it then happened to explain what's going on and it gives use the best prediction.

57 minutes ago, swansont said:

They do not physically exist.

It depends with wat you consider to be pilot waves...also how actual is phase space.

1 hour ago, swansont said:

What evidence do you have to support the idea?

Once you make measurements wave function collapse occurs and then quantum state evolves...the highest probability outcome is highly considered however an outcome of the lowest probability can still occur...the process is purely random however the process has a freedom to give out it's output...to us 'the observer' outcome...we have to wait for measurements result...however the process seem to have the freedom to throw wherever it wants to us but within the expected result.

( Correcting a previous typo, underlined it's not go it's to.)

Lets straighten out the wavefunction being not physical. You develop the wavefunction using known properties of the particles state and apply it to the Schrodinger equation or Klein Gordon etc. You can also take into consideration the experimental apparatus, error margins etc.

In QFT you can employ a probability current just a side note.

Its simply our formulas employed with previous well tested studies of the particle properties, application of the appropriate formulas.

Strictly determined via mathematics. Mathematics are not physical even though they may describe a physical state etc.

Physical is what you have measured. You measure physical properties the mathematics only describe or predict what you will measure.

That's a very important distinction

2 hours ago, MJ kihara said:

Really?

We are the new comers,consciousness has always been there,according to my thinking .

Yes really. Your thinking is not what matters. You need evidence. What meaningful definition of consciousness is there that predates life?

2 hours ago, MJ kihara said:

It depends with wat you consider to be pilot waves...also how actual is phase space.

Can you hand me a wave function?

Pilot waves are unconfirmed, which is weird for something that physically exists and would interact so readily. Phase space is a mathematical description. Reifying concepts is a common pitfall in these kinds of discussions. Along the lines of what Mordred said, effects are what is physical, not the math we use to describe them.

2 hours ago, MJ kihara said:

Once you make measurements wave function collapse occurs and then quantum state evolves...the highest probability outcome is highly considered however an outcome of the lowest probability can still occur...the process is purely random however the process has a freedom to give out it's output...to us 'the observer' outcome...we have to wait for measurements result...however the process seem to have the freedom to throw wherever it wants to us but within the expected result.

Why is consciusness required?

3 hours ago, MJ kihara said:

I considered this approach while self learning about QM wave function and it led to a lot of confusion in my head...I could not get the essence of wave function collapse...until I came across a good explanation based on inner product and the importance of orthogonality.

The writeup was likely using a Hilbert space common in QM treatments. A Hilbert space being defined from the inner product of a vector field.

Its not the only class of wavefunctions. You can have wavefunctions that do not require a Hilbert space nor the inner product. Scalar field spaces being one example. You have no need for vectors nor inner or cross product. However you can still have a wavefunction relating to number density of photons as one example based on the amplitude of the probability current.

Just an FYI.

Lol one solid clue to keep track of the distinction.

A function is a mathematical set of operations. The prefix of wave is simply naming the type of function.

Same applies to correlation function for entanglement.

Edited February 13Feb 13 by Mordred

2 hours ago, Mordred said:

However you can still have a wavefunction relating to number density of photons as one example based on the amplitude of the probability current.

Can you offer a short explanation how its related to wave function collapse...is can be of great help,to have an alternative view...photons are always moving in a certain direction therefore,vector explanation is more intuitive.

4 hours ago, Mordred said:

Physical is what you have measured. You measure physical properties the mathematics only describe or predict what you will measure.

Mathematics is the best language we can use to describe what we have measured but by its self it doesn't know what is happening.math it's not an object it's a medium of communication...and of course the best standardized form of communication with established rules and axioms.

4 hours ago, swansont said:

You need evidence.

I just gave you the evidence...

6 hours ago, MJ kihara said:

Once you make measurements wave function collapse occurs and then quantum state evolves...the highest probability outcome is highly considered however an outcome of the lowest probability can still occur...the process is purely random however the process has a freedom to give out it's output...to us 'the observer' outcome...we have to wait for measurements result...however the process seem to have the freedom to throw wherever it wants to us but within the expected result.

4 hours ago, swansont said:

What meaningful definition of consciousness is there that predates life?

It could be appropriate if we start by giving out a list of properties of consciousness....first of all what is that,that make us conclude something is conscious?

4 hours ago, swansont said:

Can you hand me a wave function?

Just an example to provide clarification...Objects interact using gravity, however,weak it is....can you hand me gravity?

4 hours ago, swansont said:

Phase space is a mathematical description.

Why do we need it.

5 hours ago, swansont said:

Reifying concepts

We are trying to bridge the gap...I have realized that as you come from classical physics to quantum physics notations and explanations become more important..if it was a spectrum one end having physical and the other end information...the pointer tends towards the information side,as you go quantum.

3 hours ago, Mordred said:

A function is a mathematical set of operations. The prefix of wave is simply naming the type of function.

Same applies to correlation function for entanglement.

What came before the other...is it the function or what is happening ?...I tend to think the function is the best thing we invented to outline what is happening.

11 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

I just gave you the evidence...

You said “according to my thinking” which is not evidence. I didn’t see anything else

11 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

It could be appropriate if we start by giving out a list of properties of consciousness....first of all what is that,that make us conclude something is conscious?

This is your assertion, so the burden is on you to provide this definition.

11 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

Just an example to provide clarification...Objects interact using gravity, however,weak it is....can you hand me gravity?

Nope. But I never said gravity was a physical object, so I don’t see how this is anything but a distraction.

11 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

Why do we need it.

It’s a useful concept in some circumstances

11 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

We are trying to bridge the gap...I have realized that as you come from classical physics to quantum physics notations and explanations become more important..if it was a spectrum one end having physical and the other end information...the pointer tends towards the information side,as you go quantum.

Asserting that there’s a spectrum is yet another speculation, which, like a house of cards, does not make for a very solid argument.

7 hours ago, MJ kihara said:

Once you make measurements wave function collapse occurs and then quantum state evolves...

Once you make a measurement the system is in a defined state. It doesn’t evolve unless there’s some other interaction (which there always is)

7 hours ago, MJ kihara said:

the highest probability outcome is highly considered however an outcome of the lowest probability can still occur...the process is purely random however the process has a freedom to give out it's output...to us 'the observer' outcome...we have to wait for measurements result...however the process seem to have the freedom to throw wherever it wants to us but within the expected result.

Yes, that’s how probability works. A 1% result can happen; if you identically prepare 1000 particles and do the measurement, you expect 10 to end up in that state.

Nothing mystical, or having to do with consciousness

3 hours ago, swansont said:

It doesn’t evolve unless there’s some other interaction (which there always is)

Which one is which one? According to you it doesn't evolve but there are always interactions that make it evolve..

Does it have to wait for interactions or does it naturally evolve until you make measurements to know its new state?

3 hours ago, swansont said:

Yes, that’s how probability works. A 1% result can happen; if you identically prepare 1000 particles and do the measurement, you expect 10 to end up in that state.

Nothing mystical, or having to do with consciousness

Am not introducing mystism into probability....I tend to think quantum wave function is distinct from throwing coins and dices...coins and dices don't evolve on themselves and of course they are classical objects.

If you put a coin head up in a box you close it and store it in a place that is stable i.e without issues like shaking and rusting..wait for 4 min,40 hours,million years open the box you expect to find head up...for a quantum particle the issue is different,therefore, we can't have the same kind of intuition from the probability calculations from the two situations.

On 2/14/2026 at 7:43 AM, MJ kihara said:

Am not introducing mystism into probability....I tend to think quantum wave function is distinct from throwing coins and dices...coins and dices don't evolve on themselves and of course they are classical objects.

It is. The rules to combine probabilities for different events are different in QM and CM. Most spectacularly so for systems of spins. Also, classical probabilities have nothing in the way of amplitudes.

But none of that means that consciousness plays any role in QM. Classicality, as we understand it today, has more to do with massive loss of quantum coherence.

On 2/14/2026 at 1:43 AM, MJ kihara said:

Which one is which one? According to you it doesn't evolve but there are always interactions that make it evolve..

Does it have to wait for interactions or does it naturally evolve until you make measurements to know its new state?

Once it’s in an eigenstate there is no probability distribution anymore; there must be an interaction for the state to change.

On 2/14/2026 at 1:43 AM, MJ kihara said:

Am not introducing mystism into probability....I tend to think quantum wave function is distinct from throwing coins and dices...coins and dices don't evolve on themselves and of course they are classical objects.

You don’t get interference, but you can toss a coin or roll a die. There are similarities to think about.

On 2/14/2026 at 1:43 AM, MJ kihara said:

If you put a coin head up in a box you close it and store it in a place that is stable i.e without issues like shaking and rusting..wait for 4 min,40 hours,million years open the box you expect to find head up...for a quantum particle the issue is different,therefore, we can't have the same kind of intuition from the probability calculations from the two situations.

There are differences, especially when you go out of your way to look at different circumstances. e.g. you allow an interaction for the quantum system, but not for the classical. The coin stays in the same state with no interaction, and that’s exactly what I said about the quantum system.

On 2/14/2026 at 2:13 AM, Mordred said:

Its not the only class of wavefunctions. You can have wavefunctions that do not require a Hilbert space nor the inner product. Scalar field spaces being one example. You have no need for vectors nor inner or cross product. However you can still have a wavefunction relating to number density of photons as one example based on the amplitude of the probability current.

Just an FYI.

The same thing will also applies to scalar fields once used to model wavefunction collapse.As long as the scalar field is not a static field but a dynamic one that changes in a probabilistic way.

20 minutes ago, swansont said:

Once it’s in an eigenstate there is no probability distribution anymore; there must be an interaction for the state to change

Just an example-if you measure an electron spin to be up spin...wait for twenty minutes do a second measurement a you sure 100% getting spin up state?

What is the minimum threshold required for a quantum state to have interaction so that it can change it's state?

I would go one step further than the other members; not only is the wave function NOT real, but there is no actual reality until an observation/interaction is made to collapse the wave function.
This concept is called 'no local realism' and is an alternate ( and preferable' explanation for entanglement than 'non locality'.

On 2/13/2026 at 11:55 AM, MJ kihara said:

So narrow minded... I just did it and am not what your have referred to above.

As a scientist, I defer to the evidence.

On 2/13/2026 at 2:30 PM, MJ kihara said:

however an outcome of the lowest probability can still occur...the process is purely random

Varying outcomes can occurr, but they are not random.
The preferred outcome is still governed by scientific principles , like Least Action.

1 hour ago, MJ kihara said:

Just an example-if you measure an electron spin to be up spin...wait for twenty minutes do a second measurement a you sure 100% getting spin up state?

No, because you can’t guarantee there is no interaction.

1 hour ago, MJ kihara said:

What is the minimum threshold required for a quantum state to have interaction so that it can change it's state?

I don’t know that there is one.

29 minutes ago, MigL said:

I would go one step further than the other members; not only is the wave function NOT real, but there is no actual reality until an observation/interaction is made to collapse the wave function.

Your statement is contradictory:...'wave function NOT real'.....'observation/interaction is made to collapse the wave function'..

How does something that is not real collapse?

Non locality infact enhances argument of consciousness,it isn't a local thing it's global or rather universal.

39 minutes ago, MigL said:

Varying outcomes can occurr, but they are not random.

The person making the measurements does not dictate the outcome even if the results are spread within a certain limit....they are random to the extend you are doing the measurement to know the result.... otherwise, what's the need of measure?

46 minutes ago, MigL said:

The preferred outcome is still governed by scientific principles

Scientific principles were derived after making observations... scientific principles don't do experiments...they might as well be principles of consciousness that we label scientific principle...long before humans wrote down scientific principles,quantum processes and other classical processes e.g planets orbiting stars were taking place.

42 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

How does something that is not real collapse?

There is no reality until an observation/interaction is made.

You, nor anyone else, can prove otherwise.
Think about it ...

Edited Sunday at 03:15 PM4 days by MigL

3 hours ago, MJ kihara said:

What is the minimum threshold required for a quantum state to have interaction so that it can change it's state?

In Feymann integrals the propogator ( a propogator propagates an operator) with the propogator being the internal lines and operator being the external solid lines ( observables ) ie real particles with internal often associated with virtual particles though its more accurate to just treat the propogator as field.

You require one quanta of effective progator action to affect an operator .

Thats about the only way one can potentially denotes some form of minimal threshold that I myself am aware of.

1 hour ago, MJ kihara said:

Your statement is contradictory:...'wave function NOT real'.....'observation/interaction is made to collapse the wave function'..

How does something that is not real collapse?

It’s descriptive language.

If you fall in love do you literally fall?

Collapse of the wavefunction is less cumbersome than “a superposition of multiple wavefunctions of an undetermined state are determined to be one particular eigenstate”

12 minutes ago, Mordred said:

You require one quanta of effective progator action to affect an operator .

But you can have one quantum, e.g. a photon, where there is no threshold of energy

agreed though propogators cannot be directly measured and include probability currents which are mathematical as well

2 hours ago, MigL said:

There is no reality until an observation/interaction is made.

You, nor anyone else, can prove otherwise.
Think about it ...

💤😇 ...You are going overdrive...if you mix consciousness discussion which already is a messy issue, that we are trying to keep in order,with..'no reality'..the head will go pop 🤯.

What's your take on phase space and it's connection to physical world?