Hi angels!
I recently came across a YouTube video called "The Existential Crisis Iceberg" by Alex O'Connor, in which the concept of quantum immortality was discussed. I've had a brief introduction to quantum physics in my high school classes, and upon hearing about immortality my interest was immediately piqued. After doing some further research, and grappling with the vast existential implications of quantum immortality, I knew I had to write a blog post/brain dump, so here it is!
I few things to note: I am not a physicist, nor do I have more than a very rudimentary knowledge of quantum principles. Because of this, everything I discuss here will be framed in a much more philosophical lens, rather than getting into the nitty-gritty mathematics of it all (besides, there's nothing I hate talking about more than math). Also, no cats were harmed in the making of this post.
Before I get into what quantum immortality is, I think it is best to start with a famous thought experiment: Schrödinger's Cat. According to superposition, which is a fundamental law of quantum mechanics, a quantum event can exist in multiple theoretical states at the same time. It is only when that event is observed does it become confined to a single reality (the reality of the observer). However, that does not mean that the other outcomes cease to exist, but instead merely take place in alternate realities. In scientific contexts, tiny particles (e.g. atoms) have been mathematically proven to exhibit this behavior. Schrödinger's thought experiment seeks to apply this logic to events of broader consequence (that extend beyond the microscopic).
The experiment goes something like this: A cat enters a box that no one can see inside of or directly interact with. Inside the box is a vial of poison gas, which has a 100% chance of killing the cat if broken. The box also contains an isolated radioactive atom that has a 50% chance of decaying within an hour. If the atom does decay, the action is recorded by a Geiger counter (an electronic device that measures radiation), which signals a mechanical hammer to hit the vial, thus releasing the gas and killing the cat.
As morbid as this experiment is, it is incredibly thought provoking. Based on the very design of the experiment, a quantum event (the decaying atom) is directly responsible for whether or not the cat dies. So if we apply the logic of superposition—that quantum particles can exist in multiple theoretical states at the same time until observed—the same can be said of the cat. Whatever occurs inside the box is not known until someone looks inside, so quantum mechanics states that the entire structure enters superposition. This means that the cat is both dead and alive inside of the box until someone looks inside and reality is confined to a dead or alive binary. While this experiment is entirely theoretical, it has tremendous philosophical and scientific implications.
Quantum immortality behaves very similarly to what I explained with Schrödinger's cat, and is rooted in the Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI) of quantum mechanics. MWI theorizes that a conscious observer can never experience death from their point of view. Because of this, at every event where one's death could occur (e.g. a car crash), reality splits into two outcomes: The conscious observer lives, or the conscious observer dies. Because one's consciousness cannot exist in nothingness, it will automatically jump to the reality in which the observer lives, and continue to do so infinitely. The alternate reality (in which the observer died in the car crash) still exists, but the conscious observer doesn't experience it. Again, our consciousness will only ever jump to a reality in which we live, meaning that from our perspective we will never experience death.
When I first learned about this theory my mind was blown. I'm a pretty firm believer that after we die there is simply nothingness. To discover a theory that not only proposed immortality, but was related to proven scientific principles (superposition) was fascinating; liberating, even. However, before I get ahead of myself there are a few things I must clarify:
Quantum immortality is entirely speculative and has not been scientifically proven. In fact, it is widely seen by the scientific community to be pseudoscience because it is unfalsifiable, and impossible to test. The whole nature of quantum immortality revolves around subjectivity, meaning that outside experimenters have no way of confirming or debunking one's conscious experiences. Because of this, quantum immortality is deemed unscientific.
That being said, that doesn't mean that it doesn't propose an interesting philosophical question: Given the choice to experience quantum immortality or not, which would you choose? The certainty of death—that at the end of your conscious experience there is nothing—is terrifying, and having an unlimited amount of time to experience what life has to offer sounds wonderful, right? While jumping to realities in which you live might be nice for awhile, evading conscious death comes at a price. Just because you live, that doesn't mean that your body isn't subjected to the natural aging process. Assuming quantum immortality to be true, you will inevitably live to an age so extreme that the burden of living in your physical body will become torturous. You could become subjected to disease, disability, or cognitive decline as a result of quantum immortality unnaturally extending your life. No matter how debilitating your physical state, quantum immortality always favors life over death. Thus, you will be forced to endure this decline until at some point your body no longer possess the ability to live at all, at which point the chain your consciousness travels down will finally end. The blissful period of immortality may seem freeing at first, but I expect it would get old very, very quickly. On the other hand, one could argue that the mere possibility of an extended conscious existence (regardless of inevitable pain as time progresses) is better than being guaranteed to die in X amount of years.
Another question to ask yourself is, where do we derive the value of life from? Is it from lived experiences, consciousness, our uniquely human abilities, or our limited existence? Some people say that things hold value simply because they are finite. Could the same be true for us? If we were to theoretically live forever, would our human experiences hold less significance?
Ultimately, thinking about quantum immortality raises far more questions than it answers, but I think that is precisely why the theory is so fascinating. It forces us to confront our reality, and ask ourselves what (if anything) changes if our consciousness never dies. If our conscious self jumps from each reality in which it survives, do we remain who we were at the very beginning, or at each "jump" do we become someone new? Does life lose meaning if there isn't an end point? Is the "self" consciousness, or something more? Could we all be experiencing quantum immortality but have no awareness of it? How will our desire to make ethical, productive, or urgent choices change if the time we have to do so is limitless? These are questions I am still wrestling with, and ones that I doubt have simple answers.
I can't say I personally believe in quantum immortality, and based on the general consensus there seems to be strong scientific evidence that refutes it. Nevertheless, approaching the concept through a theoretical lens had allowed me to reexamine the parts of my humanity that I had never given a second thought to before. It is interesting to see the overlap between science and philosophy, two fields that I once thought shared few commonalities.
I know this post was a little out there, but if you read this far thank you for sticking with me! I hope learning about quantum immortality was as interesting for you as it was for me. xx
Here is the YouTube video I mentioned for anyone interested! Click me <3
No comments:
Post a Comment