Σχετίζεται η κατάρρευση της κυματοσυνάρτησης με την ελεύθερη θέληση; / Is the wavefunctional collapse related to free will?

# Is the wavefunctional collapse related to free will? No. It is not.

## No spin collapse alternative theory predicts a magically pre-existing personhood/consciousness (in philosophy)

Is the wavefunctional collapse related to free will? No. It is not.

watch the video: What Happens During a Quantum Jump? - PBS Space Time

But no alternative spin collapse theory includes a magically pre-existing personality capable mind. Consciousness as defined in the philosophy of neuroscience is a procedural result. Not a magically pre-existing personhood which secondarily creates itself.

Study the 'sense of agency'. It comes separately (different brain mechanism) and after the main thinking events. (Thinking about self-agency is not identical to attributing it. We cannot avoid examining self-referential examples. Neuroscience is based on measurement. We might have fancy opinions about magical personhood/consciousness but it doesn't matter.)

Also quantum mechanics isn't a permanently quantised ontology. Most durations in substantiality aren't permanently locked to a specific quantum property and/or state; but interactions happen during pure states... but also during transitional states (one major interpretation of gravity is transitional, without immediate transitions to pure states but via gradual entropic positional decays of the relative positionsn of particles). Can difference in timepace/timeflow amongst objects cause a gradual relativistic positional decay (lowering the overall gravitational potential)? Yes. It's called gravity.

(Roger Penrose has an antineuroscientific magical theory of the microtubules. He misinterprets them. A pre-existing consciousness/personhood creates our consciousness/personhood. Of course he never exposes his fallacy because he would reject his magical/unprocedural mistake.)

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

A transient nature of spin transition doesn't cancel Everettism (manyworldness/many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics). It would be a proof of superdeterminism, which has to become Everettian in the past, or magical (even if we invent a weird filthy = unpure [but that will not be fundamental; an unpure theory means we miss something in the ontoaxiomatic theory of our universe]... even if we invent a filthy/unpure/contraption theory, still it will be procedural and not magical]).

1. Magic/unprocedurality/the supernatural is ontologically impossible.

2. Magic having no definition isn't one's slave to create her/his brainless consciousness which is eternal, and it cannot maintain a constant purpose for a personocratic [personodominant] universe (otherwise it becomes a specific physical procedurality and it will have to be elaborated via mathematics or allomathematics, but personhood isn't a prerequisite for substantiality [substantiality is a procedural causal connectome; not a mereological simple universe or a mereological simple thinking consciousness]). It would have been arbitrary noise (actually not even that, because unprocedurality doesn't meet the prerequisites for ontoaxiomatics = substantiality).

## comment 1:

Also wavefunctional path integrals cannot help up predict exact wavefunctional evolutions.