quantum mechanics: free will (Introduction)

by dhw, Tuesday, September 03, 2013, 18:38 (4100 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: An essay that supports the quantum establishment of free will:-https://www.bigquestionsonline.com/content/what-does-quantum-physics-have-do-free-will-Note the author relates to the other worldliness that Ruth Kastner envisions.-QUOTE: "Needless to say we are still far away of [sic] understanding which the neural correlates of the different parts of an interferometer are, and how control and randomness interplay in the brain, likely because sleep is still a very poorly understood phenomenon."-Just as consciousness in general is still a very poorly understood phenomenon, together with all its ramifications, including that of free will. I shan't pretend for one moment to have understood the experiments, but would be grateful for an explanation of the following:
 
"What is more, recent experiments are bringing to light that the experimenter's free will and consciousness should be considered axioms (founding principles) of standard quantum physics theory. So for instance, in experiments involving "entanglement" (the phenomenon Einstein called "spooky action at a distance"), to conclude that quantum correlations of two particles are nonlocal (i.e. cannot be explained by signals traveling at velocity less than or equal to the speed of light), it is crucial to assume that the experimenter can make free choices, and is not constrained in what orientation he/she sets the measuring devices."-It is clear to me that an unconscious experimenter is unlikely to conclude anything, but I don't understand how the authors can assume that the experimenter's "free choices" are any freer than the choices we all make in any other field of human activity. If humans are to take responsibility for their actions, "it is crucial to assume" that they are not robots. But does that prove they have free will? I'm not saying we don't have free will ... I'm just asking for an explanation of the logic.
 
QUOTE: "But are we not claiming after all that invisible non-material principles underpin the whole visible world and not only the dynamic of human brains? Does this mean that in addition to the human mind, other minds (the mind of God and other spiritual beings) govern the corporal world? And if any such non-material agency does pervade the whole universe, which behavioral features are distinctively human? These may be interesting questions for the discussion online. Be it as it may, we cannot have nature without non-material (spiritual) agency."-Interesting questions indeed, and I'm sure believers and non-believers alike will come up with whatever answers accord with their own respective theories. Since we understand so little about consciousness, and so little about the quantum world, could we not rewrite the final sentence as follows: we cannot have nature without agencies which at present cannot be explained in known material terms?