Authors: Sergey P. Suprun, Anatoly P. Suprun, Victor F. Petrenko

Series Title: Algorithms for Construction of Reality in Physics - Vol. 2

Schrödinger’s Cat Smile

Volume 2

eBook: US $49 Special Offer (PDF + Printed Copy): US $78
Printed Copy: US $54
Library License: US $196
ISSN: 2589-3572 (Print)
ISSN: 2212-8514 (Online)
ISBN: 978-981-5049-67-1 (Print)
ISBN: 978-981-5049-66-4 (Online)
Year of Publication: 2022
DOI: 10.2174/97898150496641220201


The book presents a multidisciplinary analysis of the context of quantum physics experiments and the function of the human mind that makes it possible to demonstrate that an object-based model of reality formed at the level of the unconscious is the basis of our worldview.

The consciousness experiences a “time flow” because of the specific features of perception in the form of a model with a sequential fixation of events. Together with the need to relate objects in terms of the model, this generates a space-time representation of the world around us. Acceptance of a mental character of our construct of reality allows for resolution of the problems in quantum physics and its paradoxes, thereby opening the way to an insight into reality.

The presented material is organized in a specific order to facilitate the reader’s understanding. First, the fact that if there are no objects in the area of quantum mechanics, then they belong to the corresponding model rather than the reality is proved by case studies of the most discussed and relevant paradoxes of quantum physics. The authors consider a topological variant in constructing an object-based space that describes the physical properties of an object that are the most verified in science and describable with mathematical relations. The functionality of the proposed construct is tested by deriving the “laws” of conservation of energy and momentum in a relativistic form.

The book is oriented towards experts in physics and psychology, advanced students, and readers interested in state-of-the-art science and the philosophy connected to it.

Audience: Experts in physics and psychology. Anyone interested in the science of reality and consciousness.


The second volume of the series of monographs titled Algorithms for Construction of Reality in Physics continues the successive analysis of the form and content of the worldview perceived by humans. The fact that we are “submerged” in the model of reality that is constructed by our unconscious, that is, is not controlled by consciousness, is substantiated. As early as 100 years ago, Henri Poincare paid attention to how and why, for example, the perception of space could emerge although, at that time, this was a flash of a genius unsupported by any psychophysiological research data. Strange as it may seem, the problem of reality has become extremely relevant with the development of quantum physics. The experiments in this scientific area have illustratively demonstrated that our naïve notions about the objects residing in spacetime fail to fit the reality. Quantum teleportation, i.e., the transfer of quantum state at any velocity including that faster than the speed of light, demonstrates the absence of locality (or separability), which means that the integrity of reality has no spatial limits. The experiments with delayed selection of a “quantum eraser” type make it possible to change “the past”, suggesting the absence of any time constraints. Thus, the “instrumentality” of their studies (the answer is numeric) brought physicists at the cutting edge of the research into reality rather than its model, suggested to us by our unconscious.

In the case when it is difficult to separate reality and its model, it is reasonable to study the mechanisms of how the model was constructed. A psychosemantic approach makes it possible to analyze the specific features of such construct and to infer what in it is God-given and what is evil. From this standpoint, it is of interest to consider an object-based space with qualities as unit vectors. This helps to answer the question of what are the principles of conservation of, for example, energy and momentum. We regard these principles as the laws of Nature rather that the rules according to which the model reality functions and the main requirements of which are logic and preservation of the content. As it happens, these “laws of Nature” in terms of relativity are deducible even without the hypothesis of spacetime existence.

In the context of this approach, it is reasonable to take a fresh look at the problems in quantum physics. With this in mind, it becomes clear that the attitudes of an object-based model of reality in our consciousness are the particular factor that prevents us from an open-minded consideration of the experimental results in this area of knowledge. We “see” objects residing in spacetime where they do not exist and have never existed. It is believed a priori that the so-called entangled pair is a pair of objects; however, in this case, they must “behave” as objects, have the properties of objects, and evolve in a spacetime frame. However, experiments illustratively demonstrate that this is not the case. Perhaps, they are not objects?

In this sense, it is also interesting to consider some particular problems associated with our consciousness that are suspiciously analogous to certain phenomena in physics. Here, we do not make any far-reaching conclusions; our goal was to merely attract attention to these analogies. The parallels between the oriental philosophy of Buddhism and modern scientific concepts have long been discussed in the relevant literature and this is not at all accidental. The western methodology has successively implemented mainly object-based decomposition of the world (completely free from the subject, the “apex of creation”) and is continuing to develop it even in the systemic paradigm of quantum physics, thereby giving birth to the “centaurs”, such as wave mechanics. The oriental scholastics from the very beginning developed a holistic, systems-based view on reality with the man as its inherent subsystem. Since all evolving subsystems are open and, correspondingly, linked to the system of individual consciousness, this made it possible to embrace other types of “consciousnesses” with different forms of reality representation and other properties inaccessible in the boundaries of our type of perception. They were the first to study the categories of integrity (emergence), purposefulness, the hierarchy of open systems (theory of the dharmas, Samsara and Nirvana, and so on) and analyzed the limitations of our language and thinking in the understanding of reality. Zen Buddhism has implemented an original psychotechnique allowing its adepts to trace the boundaries of their own consciousness with the help of specific limit questions, a kind of antinomies, the koans.

All these problems although in another form have again become relevant now. We have become captive to one of a multitude of forms of representation (modeling) of reality characteristic of our rather limited type of perception.

The issues described in the book and its content are interdisciplinary research, which most likely make the understanding not that easy. However, we believe that this will motivate the readers to search the literature by themselves for the facts that confirm or, perhaps, refute the described ideas. We will be glad to receive any sound criticism and are always open to discussion of any relevant issues.


Not applicable.


The authors declare no conflict of interest, financial or otherwise.


Many people have helped us during the work on this monograph and we would like to thank them for their assistance and support as well as for the time they spent reading the manuscript and their helpful advice.

The authors thank Viktor Ovsyuk, Yaroslav Bazaikin, and Vladimir Shumskiy for their discussion on the manuscript and helpful criticism.

Our special appreciation to our wives, both Galinas, for correcting the text and for their patience and understanding during our work on the manuscript.

We also acknowledge the work of our translator Galina Chirikova, who had to deal with the terminology of sciences so distant from one another and are especially grateful for her critical remarks, which we regard as very helpful for making the text clear.

This statement is to certify that all authors have seen and approved the manuscript being submitted. We warrant that the book is the Authors' original work. We warrant that the book has not received prior publication and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere.

Sergey P. Suprun
Laboratory of Heterostructure Physics and Technology
Institute of Semiconductor Physics
Siberian Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences
Novosibirsk, Russia

Anatoly P. Suprun
Laboratory of Psychology of Communication and Psychosemantics
Psychology Department, Lomonosov Moscow State University

Victor F. Petrenko
Laboratory of Psychology of Communication and Psychosemantics
Psychology Department, Lomonosov Moscow State University