Consciousness, Libertarian Free Will and Quantum Randomness

  • Chetan S. Mandayam Nayakar
  • S. Omkar
  • R. Srikanth


The basic question in the long-standing debate about free will (FW) is not whether FW can be demonstrated to exist nor even whether it exists, but instead how to define it scientifically. If FW is not dismissed as an illusion nor identified with a variety of unpredictability, then logical paradoxes arise that make FW elusive to define. We resolve these paradoxes through a model of FW, in which FW is a new causal primitive empowered to override physical causality under guidance. We develop a simple mathematical realization of this model that when applied to quantum theory suggests that the exercise of FW corresponds to a non-linear positive operator-valued measure (POVM) causing deviations from the Born rule. In principle, these deviations would stand in conflict with known conservation laws and invariance principles, implying that the brain, the presumed seat of FW, may be an arena of non-standard physics. However, in practice, it will be difficult to distinguish these deviations from quantum and neural noise and statistical fluctuations. We indicate possible neurobiological and neurological tests, implications and applications of our proposed model.


Probability Vector Causal Determinism Born Rule Physical Dynamic Hard Determinism 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Bohm, D., & Hiley, B. (1993). The undivided universe: An ontological interpretation of quantum theory. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Brecht, M., Schneider, M., Sakmann, B., & Margrie, T. W. (2004). Whisker movements evoked by stimulation of single pyramidal cells in rat motor cortex. Nature, 427, 704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Conway, J., & Kochen, S. (2006). The free will theorem. Foundations of Physics, 36, 1441. arXiv:quant-ph/0604079.Google Scholar
  4. Conway, J., & Kochen, S. (2008). The strong free will theorem. American Mathematical Society, 56, 2. arXiv:0807.3286.Google Scholar
  5. Esposito, S. (2012). A personal point of view about scientific discussions on free will. Eprint arXiv:1202.3395.Google Scholar
  6. Gisin, N. (2010a). The free will theorem, stochastic quantum dynamics and true becoming in relativistic quantum physics. arXiv:1002.1392.Google Scholar
  7. Gisin, N. (2010b). Are there quantum effects coming from outside space-time? Nonlocality, free will and “no many-worlds”. quant-ph/1011.3440.Google Scholar
  8. Hall, M. J. W. (2010). Local deterministic model of singlet state correlations based on relaxing measurement independence. Physical Review Letters, 105, 250404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hameroff, S., & Penrose, R. (1996). Orchestrated objective reduction of quantum coherence in brain microtubules: The “Orch OR” model for consciousness.
  10. Hodgson, D. (2001). Constraint, empowerment, and guidance: A conjectural classification of laws of nature. Philosophy, 76, 341–70.
  11. Hossenfelder, S. (2012). The free will function. arXiv:1202.0720.Google Scholar
  12. Libet, B., Gleason, C. A., Wright, E. W., & Pearl, D. K. (1983). Time of conscious intention to act in relation to onset of cerebral activity (readiness-potential): The unconscious initiation of a freely voluntary act. Brain, 106(3), 623–642. doi:10.1093/brain/106.3.623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Maye, A., Hsieh, C.-H., Sugihara, G., & Brembs, B. (2007). Order in spontaneous behavior. PLoS ONE, 2(5), e443. Available freely online from
  14. Nikolič, H. (2010). Closed timelike curves, superluminal signals, and “free will” in universal quantum mechanics. arXiv:1006.0338.Google Scholar
  15. O’Connor, T. (2010). Free will.
  16. Penrose, R. (1994). Shadows of the mind. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Puryear, H. B. (1982). The Edgar Cayce Primer: Discovering the path to self-transformation. New York: Bantam Books.Google Scholar
  18. Ramachandran, V., & Blakeslee, S. (1999). Phantoms in the brain. New York: Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
  19. Roskies, A. (2011). Interviewed in ‘Neuroscience vs philosophy: Taking aim at free will’. Nature, 477, 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Srikanth, R. (2010). Entanglement, intractability and no-signaling. Physica Scripta, 81, 065002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Srikanth, R. (2012). Srimadbhagavad Gita in the new age.
  22. Stapp, H. (2001). Quantum theory and the role of mind in nature. quant-ph/0805.0116.Google Scholar
  23. Suarez, A. (2008). Quantum randomness can be controlled by free will – A consequence of the before-before experiment. arxiv:0804.0871.Google Scholar
  24. Suarez, A. (2010a). The general free will theorem. arxiv:1006.2485.Google Scholar
  25. Suarez, A. (2010b). The free will theorem and the flash ontology implicitly assume the before-before experiment and thereby imply free will. Comment on a note by Nicolas Gisin in arXiv:1002.1392v1, arxiv:1006.2485.Google Scholar
  26. ’t Hooft, G. (2007). The free-will postulate in quantum mechanics. quant-ph/0701097.Google Scholar
  27. Timpe, K. (2006). Free will.
  28. Trevena, J., & Miller, J. (2010). Brain preparation before a voluntary action: Evidence against unconscious movement initiation. Consciousness and Cognition, 19(1), 447–456. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2009.08.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Vedral, V. (2006). Is the universe deterministic? New Scientist, 192, 55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer India 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chetan S. Mandayam Nayakar
    • 1
  • S. Omkar
    • 1
  • R. Srikanth
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Theoretical SciencesPoornaprajna Institute of Scientific ResearchBangaloreIndia
  2. 2.Raman Research InstituteBangaloreIndia

Personalised recommendations