In being John Malkovich, the female character claims that she was Malkovich when she was inside him, but in fact that’s not true. She was observing Malkovich. So the equivalent in quantum mechanics is there’s a difference between observing and measuring. > [!ai]+ AI > > You’re right to draw a parallel between the experience in *Being John Malkovich* and the observer effect in quantum mechanics, but the analogy isn’t perfect and needs some clarification. The film explores the subjective experience of consciousness and identity, while quantum mechanics deals with the physical interaction between systems. > Here’s a breakdown of the key differences and why the simple “observing vs. measuring” distinction isn’t quite enough: > - **Being John Malkovich:** Lotte Schwartz claims *to be* Malkovich, experiencing the world through his senses and even influencing his actions to a limited extent. This is a narrative device exploring the blurring of identities and the nature of subjective experience. It doesn’t have a direct parallel in physics. > - **Quantum Mechanics - Observation:** In quantum mechanics, “observation” often refers to any interaction a quantum system has with its environment. This interaction can cause the system’s wave function to “collapse” from a superposition of states (existing in multiple possibilities simultaneously) into a single, definite state. Even the presence of a stray photon can constitute an “observation” in this sense. It’s not about conscious observation by a human. > - **Quantum Mechanics - Measurement:** “Measurement” is a more specific type of observation where we deliberately set up an apparatus to extract information about a particular property of a quantum system. This involves an interaction that entangles the system with the measuring device, leading to a definite outcome that we can record. The key difference here is the *intentionality* and the *recording of information*. > **Why the analogy breaks down:** > - **Consciousness:** The film focuses on the subjective experience of *being* someone else. Quantum mechanics doesn’t deal with consciousness. The “observer” in quantum mechanics isn’t necessarily a conscious being; it’s anything that interacts with the system. > - **Information transfer:** Lotte seemingly gains information about Malkovich’s inner life. In a quantum measurement, information is transferred from the system to the measuring device, but it’s about physical properties, not subjective experiences. > - **Control:** Lotte exerts some control over Malkovich’s actions. While measurements in quantum mechanics influence the system’s state, they don’t provide the kind of direct control depicted in the film. > **A better analogy:** > Perhaps a closer analogy would be to think of Lotte’s experience as akin to weakly coupling to Malkovich’s system, perturbing it slightly but not fully “measuring” or collapsing it into a single state. She’s getting glimpses of his reality without fundamentally altering it (at least initially). This is still a loose analogy, but it avoids the pitfalls of equating conscious experience with quantum observation. > In short, while *Being John Malkovich* provides a fascinating thought experiment about identity and consciousness, it’s important not to conflate its fictional premise with the actual principles of quantum mechanics. The “observer” in quantum mechanics is a much broader concept than the subjective experience of being someone else. Oh, so that’s basically higher levels of consciousness. When they first went in Malkovich, they could merely observe him, but they learned over time how to be him and actually take him over. > [!ai]+ AI > > That’s an interesting interpretation through the lens of consciousness, but it still misses the mark regarding the core principles of quantum mechanics. The film’s portrayal of “taking over” Malkovich is a fictional conceit about control and identity, not a reflection of how quantum observation works. > Here’s why your interpretation doesn’t align with quantum mechanics: > - **Quantum mechanics is probabilistic, not deterministic:** Even when we “measure” a quantum system, we don’t gain deterministic control over its future state. We can only predict the probabilities of different outcomes. In the film, the characters eventually exert a kind of puppet-master control over Malkovich. This has no equivalent in quantum mechanics. > - **No “higher levels” of observation in QM:** The idea of “levels” of observation leading to greater control doesn’t exist in quantum mechanics. The interaction either causes a collapse of the wave function (decoherence) or it doesn’t. There’s no gradual process of gaining more and more control through repeated observation. > - **Consciousness is irrelevant:** Again, consciousness plays no role in quantum observation. The interaction between the system and its environment is what matters, regardless of whether a conscious being is involved. > The film’s narrative about gaining control over Malkovich is a metaphorical exploration of power, identity, and free will. It’s not meant to be a scientifically accurate depiction of quantum phenomena. While the initial act of entering Malkovich might be loosely analogous to a weak interaction, the subsequent “taking over” has no basis in quantum theory. Okay, how could this idea and the interconnection between the entities be better expressed while still preserving the intent? > [!ai]+ AI > > To better express the idea of interconnection and observation without misrepresenting quantum mechanics, you could explore these avenues: > **1. Focus on Entanglement:** Instead of “taking over,” consider the idea of entanglement. The characters could become entangled with Malkovich, their fates and experiences becoming intertwined. This reflects the quantum concept where two or more particles become linked, sharing the same fate even when separated. This avoids the issue of control and reflects a more subtle, interconnected relationship. > **2. Information Transfer, Not Control:** Rather than controlling Malkovich, the characters could gain access to his thoughts, memories, or sensory experiences. This could be depicted as a flow of information, perhaps visualized as streams of light or data. This emphasizes observation and access to information without implying direct control, aligning better with the concept of quantum measurement. > **3. Probabilistic Influence:** Instead of deterministic control, the characters’ influence on Malkovich could be probabilistic. Their actions within his consciousness could alter the *likelihood* of him taking certain actions, but not guarantee them. This aligns with the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics. > **4. Explore Subjective Experience:** Lean into the film’s existing strength: the exploration of subjective experience. Focus on how the characters’ perceptions of reality are altered by their connection to Malkovich. How does their sense of self change? How do they experience the boundaries between their consciousness and his? This avoids the need for a direct quantum analogy and allows for a more metaphorical exploration of consciousness. > **5. Invent a Fictional “Field”:** Create a fictional “consciousness field” or “psychic network” that governs the interconnection between individuals. This allows you to establish your own rules and explore the concept of interconnected consciousness without being constrained by the laws of physics. This is a common approach in science fiction, allowing for creative exploration while acknowledging that it’s not meant to be scientifically accurate. > **Example using Entanglement:** > Imagine the characters entering Malkovich, not to control him, but to experience a profound entanglement. Their emotions and sensations become intertwined with his. When they feel joy, he experiences a faint echo of it. When they experience fear, his heart rate subtly increases. They can’t control his actions, but they are inextricably linked, sharing a portion of his subjective reality. This emphasizes connection and shared experience without the problematic notion of direct control. > By focusing on these alternative approaches, you can explore the themes of interconnectedness and altered perception without misrepresenting the principles of quantum mechanics. This allows for a more nuanced and thought-provoking exploration of consciousness and identity.