Me, a Wave.
The ridge of an ocean wave is never the same. We watch it approach the shore, recognizing its identity moment to moment, yet the water molecules that form it are in constant flux. Each particle rises, carries energy forward, then falls back into the depths. The wave isn’t its components but their coordinated dance — a pattern born from countless ephemeral unions.
This same fluidity shapes my own boundaries. My body continuously rebuilds itself with matter once foreign to me. The trillions of microbes in my gut — technically not “me” by DNA standards — are essential to my existence. Where does my self begin and end? The question has no fixed answer.
My social self spills beyond my skin, existing in conversations and memories scattered across other minds. And the feeling of being me persists through shifting thoughts and fluctuating awareness. Like the wave, I’m less a thing and more a process — a temporary pattern moving through time and space.
But this raises a more fundamental question: what is anything, really? Our entire understanding of reality rests on a profound paradox — that existence somehow sprang from non-existence, that time emerged from a state of no-time. We build our science and logic atop this seeming impossibility, rarely questioning what it means for how we understand the world.
What if we start differently? What if everything exists — all possibilities, all configurations of matter and energy — and we, like the crest of a wave, are simply one viewpoint where countless potential states converge? Perhaps consciousness isn’t something that emerges from particles but the experience of riding this probability superhighway, where quantum mechanics, information theory, and even mystical traditions point toward the same horizon: a reality far more fluid, connected, and strange than our everyday experience suggests.
Double Slit
This radical proposition isn’t mere philosophical speculation. It finds surprising support in one of physics’ most enduring and bewildering experiments. For nearly 250 years, the double-slit experiment has periodically reincarnated to reveal ever deeper mysteries about matter and its relationship to observation — mysteries that challenge our most fundamental assumptions about reality.
The experiment’s initial birth occurred in 1801 when Thomas Young stood before the Royal Society in London with a simple apparatus: a beam of light shone through a screen with two slits, casting an enigmatic pattern of alternating bright and dark bands. This interference pattern seemed to confirm light’s wave nature. But the early 20th century brought a crisis — light, it seemed, also behaved as particles.
To understand this paradox, imagine two macroscopic recreations. In Young’s case, picture a pool bisected by a wall with two slits. Waves created on one side pass through these slits, forming ridges where they add together and plains where they cancel out — just as Young observed with light. Einstein’s perspective a hundred years later, suggested a different picture: imagine a soccer field similarly bisected. A player kicking balls through the slits would create two distinct piles on the other side, each independent of the other. These competing views demanded resolution.
This wave-particle mystery deepened when Louis de Broglie proposed it wasn’t unique to light — all matter could exhibit both behaviors. When electrons were fired through two slits, they too created interference patterns like waves. Yet a stranger truth emerged: if detectors were placed to observe which slit an electron passed through, this wave-like pattern vanished. The mere act of measurement forced wave-like possibility into particle-like certainty, a phenomenon that would become central to our understanding of quantum mechanics.
By the turn of the millennium, Anton Zeilinger’s team had scaled up the experiment to ‘buckyballs’ — complex molecules of 60 carbon atoms — demonstrating that even large objects could exist in quantum superposition. As of 2019, the largest object observed in a superimposed state contained 2,000 atoms. The implications are staggering: our reality is not composed of solid, definite objects, but of probability clouds that only appear solid when we interact with them.
This trajectory of discovery utterly liquifies our presupposition of reality. Every bit of matter we contact only appears solidified because it has ended up somewhere in our causal chain of interaction. The double-slit experiment shows us quite vicerally that particles exist in multiple states until observed. Not only this, but the superposed states interact with each other in a meaningful way — the enigmatic bands we observe across from the slits.
But why would these different states of existence interact at all? The answer may lie in efficiency. If reality is an information system, then quantum mechanics might simply be its compression algorithm. Just as digital systems minimize redundancy while preserving meaning, the universe appears to encode multiple possibilities in single mathematical structures — wave functions. We, as observers, are essentially “lossy decoders,” capable of experiencing only one configuration at a time from this compressed state of possibilities. When we measure a particle, we force the extraction of a single value, collapsing the wave function into a definite state.
If this is true for the simplest units of matter, what implications does it hold for the vastly more complex system of human consciousness? Taking these quantum truths with our first postulate then, that everything exists, perhaps consciousness is the feeling of riding this probability superhighway. Just as a wave is not its particles but their coordinated movement, consciousness might not be emergent from classical physical processes of particles but the shared representation of these particles in the multiverse.
If this is true, all matter must possess some form of consciousness. When a particle collides with another, it momentarily becomes a single point — a representative of its infinite possible states. This point of contact is a perspective, a momentary ‘view’ from the many to the one. By our definition, this is consciousness in its simplest form. But how then does our rich human experience emerge from these countless microscopic perspectives?
IIT and OOR
The leap from particle-level consciousness to human experience seems vast, yet perhaps it’s not the size of the gap that matters, but how information is structured across it. Two modern theories offer complementary perspectives on this puzzle: Integrated Information Theory (IIT) proposes that consciousness emerges from the complex integration of information, while Orchestrated Objective Reduction (OOR) suggests quantum processes in neural microtubules as its physical basis. Rather than choosing between these frameworks, what if we consider how they might work in concert to explain our rich conscious experience?
IIT, developed by Tononi, proposes that consciousness is intrinsic to certain physical systems — specifically, those that integrate information in complex, irreducible ways. The theory introduces Φ (phi) as a measure of integrated information, suggesting that the higher the Φ value, the richer the conscious experience. A system has high Φ when its parts work together to create states that cannot be reduced to the sum of their individual components, much like how a melody is more than just individual notes played in sequence, or an ocean wave is not its individual particles.
Get Wesley Beckner’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
The human brain, with its densely interconnected neural networks, represents one of the most informationally integrated systems we know of. Each neuron’s state influences and is influenced by countless others, creating a vast web of interdependencies. However, calculating the precise value of Φ for even modest systems quickly becomes computationally intractable due to the astronomical number of possible system states and their interactions.
OOR, proposed by Penrose and Hameroff, suggests that consciousness arises from quantum computations in neural microtubules — protein structures within brain cells. The theory posits that these microtubules maintain quantum coherence long enough to perform meaningful computation, and that consciousness emerges when quantum superpositions in these structures spontaneously collapse due to fundamental properties of spacetime geometry.
While OOR focuses on the specific physical mechanism of consciousness, IIT provides a broader framework for understanding how consciousness scales with complexity. Consider how these theories might complement each other: If consciousness indeed emerges from quantum processes in microtubules, then the Φ value of neural systems must account for not just classical neural states, but the vast array of quantum possibilities within each microtubule.
This quantum contribution to Φ would be staggering. Each collapsed quantum state represents not just a single configuration, but a convergence point for countless possible states — much like our wave crest metaphor. The information content of these quantum states, when integrated across the brain’s neural network, would far exceed any classical estimation of Φ. This might explain why conscious experience feels so rich and irreducible — each moment of awareness represents the integration of virtually infinite quantum possibilities into a single, unified experience.
Challenges remain with both IIT and OOR. The measure of Φ is particularly intractable and the stability and presence of coherent quantum states in the brain has yet to be proven. Though there are challenges in working out the details of these theories, their basic tenor has many attractive ties with what we’ve discovered with quantum mechanics. As we shall see, it too has a resonance with the wisdom of more ancient spiritual and religious ideas.
Conscious Mystical
The partnership between consciousness and matter in this framework is striking: our experience of reality is like that of a lossy decoder, forcing many possible states into singular particles, yet the very feeling of experience emerges from our wave nature. We are constantly rushing forward from a present of possibilities to a path ultimately taken, and at every moment this is happening over and over again. This duality — between observer and observed, between wave and particle — echoes through both modern physics and ancient wisdom.
Long before quantum mechanics revealed the strange unity between observer and observed, a young Indian boy was being groomed by the Theosophical Society to become a world teacher. Jiddu Krishnamurti’s early life reads like a spiritual fairy tale: discovered on a beach in India in 1909, he was raised by the Society to be the vehicle for what they called the “World Teacher,” a messianic figure they believed would guide humanity into a new age of enlightenment.
But Krishnamurti’s true significance emerged from his rejection of this predetermined role. In 1929, in a dramatic speech before thousands of followers, he dissolved the organization created to promote him, declaring that “truth is a pathless land” and that no organized religion, philosophy, or sect could lead one to it. This moment marked the beginning of his real teaching: a radical investigation into the nature of consciousness and reality that would span the next six decades.
What made Krishnamurti’s insights so remarkable was their alignment with what quantum physics would later reveal. While physicists struggled with the measurement problem — how observation itself seemed to determine reality — Krishnamurti was articulating a similar principle in the realm of consciousness. “If you understand this one radical principle,” he would say, “you will have understood something immense: that where there is an observer separating himself from the thing he observes, there must be conflict.”
This wasn’t merely philosophical speculation. Krishnamurti described a state of awareness where the traditional boundary between observer and observed dissolves. In his dialogues with physicist David Bohm, he explored how this understanding aligned with quantum mechanics. Just as the double-slit experiment shows us that observation forces wave-like possibility into particle-like certainty, Krishnamurti suggested that our usual mode of consciousness — with its division between observer and observed — creates a fragmented perception of reality.
The solution, according to Krishnamurti, lay in a fundamental shift in consciousness. When one sees that “the observer is the observed,” he claimed, it becomes possible to “observe the totality of consciousness without analysis.” This mirrors our quantum mechanical understanding that reality exists as a superposition of possibilities until observed. In Krishnamurti’s framework, true insight comes not from analytical thought (which maintains the observer-observed division) but from a state of awareness that transcends this duality.
This understanding has profound implications for our theory of consciousness as quantum integration. Krishnamurti’s description of unified awareness might be understood as moments when consciousness maintains quantum coherence across larger domains, allowing us to experience reality more as it fundamentally is — a unified field of possibilities rather than a collection of separate objects and events.
Free Agent
The best truths often reveal themselves as paradoxes, and perhaps nowhere is this more evident than in the question of free will. From an ultimate perspective, where “everything” exists, there are no choices to be made — all paths are already manifest, from worlds ending in catastrophe to those blooming in abundance. Yet we undeniably experience the sensation of choice, threading our way through a singular path.
This apparent contradiction might be resolved through the lens of integrated information. M. Scott Peck observed that psychological health exists on a spectrum between those who blame others entirely for their circumstances (character disorder) and those who blame themselves (neurosis). The truth, as always, lies in the dynamic balance between self and environment — another reflection of the observer-observed unity we’ve explored.
Our consciousness continually works to integrate information about causality, attempting to form coherent narratives about our place in this web of cause and effect. The more information we can successfully integrate, the clearer our understanding becomes of how we shape and are shaped by our reality. This integration process might be enhanced through practices like meditation.
In my experience, meditation acts like rising water in a shallow lake. Initially, our thoughts are constrained by the lake’s exposed bottom — our limited perspectives and habitual patterns. As awareness deepens, these obstructions submerge, allowing new pathways of thought to emerge. While I haven’t experienced the complete dissolution of self that mystics describe, even this basic effect enables greater integration of previously overlooked facts and circumstances.
This suggests a resolution to our free will paradox: while a skeptic might correctly observe that all possibilities already exist, our freedom lies in our capacity to integrate these possibilities into consciousness and influence which ones we experience. The more we expand our integration window — whether through meditation, contemplation, or other practices — the more we can embody that quantum principle of “one representing many,” accessing a broader spectrum of possible realities.
And so I return to the wave that I am — not just a pattern in matter, but a momentary expression of all that could be, choosing through consciousness which possibilities to manifest.
