The Consummation of Incomparable Enlightenment

In quantum ontology, the goal has been to get beyond the seeming arbitrariness of the Copenhagen Interpretation in designating some parts of reality as described by quantum mechanics and others as not being so described. Simultaneously, this implies getting beyond so-called "FAPP" arguments, or For-All-Practical-Purposes arguments. Several of the interpretations, namely Bohm's (1952 version) and Everett's, have attempted to base everything on the Schrodinger Equation. There has been some difficulty relativizing these approaches and carrying them over to quantum field theory. The central problem for these approaches is in giving meaning to the statistical predictions of quantum mechanics and the secondary problem has been in explaining the proliferation of branches unrealized by any given observer or set of observers. Moreover the whole idea of branches is only a FAPP argument. In fact, so-called "tails" remain that prevent the sharp branching effect upon which the interpretations depend. So, Henry Stapp asks, "Why not, in that case, continue to adhere to the Copenhagen Interpretation?", which is in his opinion the optimal interpretation based on FAPP arguments.

Now I have a radical new solution to the quantum ontology problem. I say there are two unitary processes that are joined together by a boundary value problem and that together describe completely the quantum measurement or observational problem. I accept von Neumann's Ansatz of I (actually observed system), II (measuring instruments), and III (actual observer). I examine these hypostases from the standpoint of both unitary processes and then try to mesh them together in a continuous and unbroken way.

The two unitary process are, on the one hand, the non-relativistic Schrodinger Equation and, on the other hand, the world formula of Heisenberg for radically unified quantum field theory. The implication is that spin and relativistic effects are artifacts of the observational process. Actually mass is as well. Evidently then, the Schrodinger Equation is not regarded as a fundamental equation, but rather an effective description of the noumenal element in nature. The world formula, it is true, describes the whole world as opposed to some isolated part of it, but more importantly it describes the eternal reality of consciousness as the cosmic verity and that which consciousness "spins" out of itself. So, the world formula tends to describe the extra-physical elements of THOUGHT and Mind, while the Schrodinger Equation describes the rudimentary physical element, which, although rudimentary, is still governed largely by informational guidance and structuring, ala Bohm and Everett.

The Schrodinger Equation is not self-sufficient, as Henry Stapp has emphasized. It requires an Actual Event that is THOUGHT-like to bring about definite experiential elements. I take THOUGHT to be a II of von Neumann, and the Mind of the Observer to be a III. However - and here is the decisive innovation - I assume that THOUGHT is a wave in consciousness, or *chitta vritti*, and Mind is a visible wave on the ocean of Spirit (Body is the corresponding invisible or noumenal wave). The world formula of Heisenberg describes both of these real waves, which are linked by the nonlinearity of the formula, while the Schrodinger Equation continues to describe the probability wave of elementary matter.

Von Neumann's I, II, and III have been investigated somewhat thoroughly with respect to the Schrodinger Equation and actually they have been quite thoroughly investigated with respect to the world forumla, as well, where the vacuum and the ground state come into play as providing some kind of hypostatic contextual reality for the field operators. All that remains to complete the "final theory" or the "Theory Of Everything" is to mesh these two hypostatically layered systems together in such a way that the undescribed elements of each are described by the other. This is not unlike the gender problem in Jungian psychology: the anima of the man is projected onto the woman, and the animus of the woman is projected onto the man. It is the completely successful set of projections and consummate union that we are searching for.

Peter Joseph Mutnick 1949 - 2000