Search FQXi

If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home

Current Essay Contest

Previous Contests

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American


How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008

Forum Home
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help


John Merryman: "The problem is that we do experience reality as those discrete flashes of..." in The Quantum...

Thomas Ray: "(reposted in correct thread) Lorraine, Nah. That's nothing like my view...." in 2015 in Review: New...

Lorraine Ford: "Clearly “law-of-nature” relationships and associated numbers represent..." in Physics of the Observer -...

Lee Bloomquist: "Information Channel. An example from Jon Barwise. At the workshop..." in Physics of the Observer -...

Lee Bloomquist: "Please clarify. I just tried to put a simple model of an observer in the..." in Alternative Models of...

Lee Bloomquist: "Footnote...for the above post, the one with the equation existence =..." in Alternative Models of...

Thomas Ray: "In fact, symmetry is the most pervasive physical principle that exists. ..." in “Spookiness”...

Thomas Ray: "It's easy to get wound around the axle with black hole thermodynamics,..." in “Spookiness”...

click titles to read articles

Why Time Might Not Be an Illusion
Einstein’s relativity pushes physicists towards a picture of the universe as a block, in which the past, present, and future all exist on the same footing; but maybe that shift in thinking has gone too far.

The Complexity Conundrum
Resolving the black hole firewall paradox—by calculating what a real astronaut would compute at the black hole's edge.

Quantum Dream Time
Defining a ‘quantum clock’ and a 'quantum ruler' could help those attempting to unify physics—and solve the mystery of vanishing time.

Our Place in the Multiverse
Calculating the odds that intelligent observers arise in parallel universes—and working out what they might see.

Sounding the Drums to Listen for Gravity’s Effect on Quantum Phenomena
A bench-top experiment could test the notion that gravity breaks delicate quantum superpositions.

March 17, 2018

CATEGORY: The Nature of Time Essay Contest (2008) [back]
TOPIC: Time, Consciousness, and the Subjective Universe by Daegene Song [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Daegene Song wrote on Sep. 10, 2008 @ 09:41 GMT
Essay Abstract

By identifying observables in quantum theory as a reference frame for the observer, the relation between time, consciousness, and the structure of our universe is constructed. Because of the peculiar nature of consciousness, namely self-reflexive property, quantum theory fails to provide a consistent description of it due to the separation between the observer and the observed. In order to remove this inconsistency, I will argue that it is necessary to adopt a subjective model of our universe, i.e. it is not the universe that exists, rather; it is the experience of observing the universe that exists. I will then show that the Heisenberg picture with time traveling in reverse offers an accurate description of the proposed subjective universe.

Author Bio

Daegene Song obtained his A.B. and Ph.D. from the University of California at Berkeley and Oxford University, respectively. Currently, he is a research fellow at the Korea Institute for Advanced Study in Seoul. His research interest is quantum computation.

Essay removed by author request.

Bookmark and Share

paul valletta wrote on Sep. 30, 2008 @ 10:16 GMT
This is really interesting, but how doyou define a

one-dimensional line, in conjunction with a 3-Dimensional observer?..a 3-D anything cannot be emmbedded on to a 1-Dimenstional "anything" or more specific a 1-D line? There is a dimensiuonal gap between a 1-D anything and a 3-D anything, it is a 2-D area. This happens to exist at the finite boundary of all 3-D objects, a three dimensional observer would only be able to detect 2-D field signals?

You can think of a perfect vacuum as a 1-D location, anything enetering this vacuum would then transmit field energies, and this can support 3-D matter only externally? the Universe cannot and is most definatly not a "brain", with our brains contained within. Conscious brains are not being created by an higher conscious "universeal" brain?...the factor of dimensionality provides limits, if what you interestingly state (the overall picture that is), then a Proton could well exist within an Electron, form the protons perspective it only regesters the existence of the 2-d electron field, which happens, from a further out observers point of observation, to totally surround the proton?

There is dimensional time constraints,I am afraid you have failed to incrporate, consciously I can observe the dimensionality of where I exist, this is basic relativity, but nature in no way allows me to access to certain higher or lower dimensions.

Bookmark and Share

paul valletta wrote on Sep. 30, 2008 @ 10:26 GMT
What I should include is that what interaction takes place from the Electron inwards, to the single Proton, is quite different from what interjection occurs between Electrons and otwardly collective Protons, or Human observers!..there are different results, and time reveals itself in quite distinct processes.

Bookmark and Share

Daegene Song wrote on Sep. 30, 2008 @ 16:15 GMT
Hi. Paul.

Thank you for having interests in my essay.

Let me try to clear out some of your confusions. I am not defining the observer as a three dimensional object, i.e., with head, two arms, and two legs etc. Instead, I am defining the observer in terms of the universe he or she is observing, i.e., as a reference frame in observing the universe. According to standard quantum theory, the observer can then be identified as an observable (the reference frame) for a given state vector (e.g. the wavefunction of the Universe which the observer is observing). So far, I am only following standard quantum theory. However, this will lead into a problem when we consider consciousness due to the separation between the observer and the observed. Therefore, the necessity of accepting the subjective model of our universe, which was called the ‘subjective universe’, is discussed in order to remove the problem of consciousness. That is, it is not the universe that exists, but only the observer (which does not refer to the observer’s physical body, but the experience of observing the universe) exists.

Hope you find these comments helpful.

Bookmark and Share

Narendra Nath wrote on Oct. 4, 2008 @ 12:37 GMT
Dear Dr. Song,

My i say that your essay text has provided me the spiritual strength as a physicist but with the experimental background in contrast to yours!i liked your description of ' Consciousness ' a difficult concept of non-physical nature to describe or evaluate! May i request you to look up my esssay posted as ' Mysteries of the Universe ' and also may see the added post where i attached a copy of the MSS ' Science Interface with Spirituality ' based on my personal experiences of conducting R & D in Physics. May be we find some commonality to strengthen our Asian bonds Warm regards..

Bookmark and Share

Narendra Nath wrote on Oct. 7, 2008 @ 17:31 GMT
Although i should wait for your response to my posting of Oct 4, i just thought of adding the following:

The whole reality can only be perceived when the cognizer, the coganized and the process of cognition all merge. Cognizer is just a discriminating observer!. This is more or less a quote from Patanjali, an ancient saint of India , who developed the original YOGA, a technique of meditation involving some specified bodily actions over 4 centuries back!

Bookmark and Share

Narendra Nath wrote on Nov. 6, 2008 @ 09:09 GMT
Dear Dr. Song,

Sorry to bring to your notice the silence from your side towards the posts filed back on 4 & 7 October. Wonder if there is something we may have done that was foolish enough to deserve any response!

Bookmark and Share

Cristi Stoica wrote on Nov. 30, 2008 @ 07:23 GMT
Dear Dr. Song,

Interesting perspective about self-consciousness and the role of observer in Quantum Mechanics.


Cristi Stoica

Bookmark and Share

NN wrote on Nov. 30, 2008 @ 11:42 GMT
Dear Dr. Song,

Postings have waited for your response, specially as your essay has many interesting and novel features! But we could not have that benefit thus far!

Bookmark and Share

Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.