Quantum Physics and Psychoanalysis – Parallel Worlds as Parallel Identities
Vladimir Nemet
“Whoever destroys a single human life, it is as if they had destroyed an entire world; and whoever saves a single human life, it is as if they had saved an entire world.”
Talmud
Introduction
Quantum physics marks the last great paradigm of modern science. Its revolutionary nature lies in the fact that it exposes what science long denied: that reality does not appear independently of relationship, perspective, and the act of observation. Although grounded in a rigorous mathematical and experimental framework, quantum physics continually calls into question the ideas of classical objectivity, determinism, and clear boundaries between observer and observed. While the quantum paradigm does not directly interpret the phenomena of the human psyche, consciousness, or the I–Thou relation, it opens an epistemological space in which these phenomena can no longer be thought in the manner of classical or traditional science.
Unlike classical Newtonian physics, which presupposes a clear separation between subject and object, quantum physics introduces a paradoxical situation in which the act of observation becomes an integral part of the system’s description. It is precisely this instability of the boundary between observer and observed that renders the quantum paradigm unexpectedly close to philosophy and to contemporary, postmodern psychoanalysis.
It is no coincidence that the twentieth and twenty-first centuries have seen numerous attempts to connect quantum physics with the human psyche. Yet such attempts often end in metaphysical constructions, New Age interpretations, or the anthropomorphization of physical processes, in which quantum concepts are used as poetic metaphors for psychological or spiritual phenomena. These approaches, though appealing, obscure both quantum physics and psychology rather than bringing them into genuine dialogue.
Quantum Paradigm
This article proceeds from a different assumption. Quantum physics and postmodern psychoanalysis do not describe the same phenomenon, but they operate with comparable epistemological logics: indeterminacy, superposition, collapse, parallel worlds, contextuality, and the impossibility of a closed, isolated system.
This text does not ask whether human consciousness is of a quantum nature, nor does it address the question of whether quantum particles possess their own consciousness or intentionality. The answer to both questions remains negative, despite our wishes and fantasies. But where, then, do these wishes and fantasies actually come from? In other words, the text seeks to understand why the quantum paradigm emerges precisely now, at a historical moment when classical models of identity, authority, and meaning are beginning to fracture.
In this context, I introduce the concept of parallel identities as a link between psychoanalysis and the so-called parallel worlds of quantum physics. Just as, in quantum theory, parallel worlds coexist in a superposition of possibilities, so too within the psychic space identity does not appear as an unwavering unity, but as the simultaneous presence—a superposition—of two perspectives, I and Thou. It is precisely within this superposition, that the phenomenon of consciousness and personality is born: a layered network of experiences, tensions, and possibilities that shapes our inner world.
In short, I wish to show how quantum physics today represents the most intriguing and fertile metaphor for understanding the phenomena of consciousness and human personality—although, unfortunately, it remains only a metaphor.
A New Interpretation of Reality
Quantum physics opens an entirely new perspective on reality, one in which stable and autonomous entities are no longer possible. Three key phenomena—superposition, the collapse of the wave function, and parallel worlds—illustrate this fundamental shift.
1. Superposition denotes a state in which a quantum system simultaneously exists in multiple possible forms, until the act of observation “decides” its reality. The most famous illustration of this paradox is the so-called Schrödinger’s cat, a thought experiment named after the physicist Erwin Schrödinger, the originator of the concept of the wave function—one of the foundations of quantum physics. In the experiment, a cat is placed in a closed box together with a radioactive atom, a radiation detector, and a vial of poison. If the atom decays, the detector releases the poison and the cat dies; if it does not decay, the cat remains alive. According to quantum theory, the atom is simultaneously decayed and not decayed, in a superposition of two states. As long as the box remains closed, the cat is both alive and dead. Its reality hovers between two possibilities, becoming final only at the moment of interaction with the observer. In this tension between potentiality and the act of opening the box lies the significance of quantum logic, which disrupts our customary understanding of reality and the boundary between observer and observed.
2. The collapse of the wave function describes the moment when measurement or observation “selects” one of the possible states of superposition. In the case of the cat, opening the box causes the superposition of the atomic state to collapse into one concrete state: the atom has decayed or it has not, and the cat is alive or dead. Thus, the quantum phenomenon shows that the outcome is not predetermined but emerges at the moment of measurement.
3. Parallel worlds, a concept developed by the American physicist Hugh Everett in 1957. under the name of the Many-Worlds Interpretation, open a space in quantum physics in which all possible realities coexist simultaneously, each in its own separate universe. Schrödinger’s cat thus exists, after the box is opened, alive in one universe and dead in another. Superposition, through measurement or observation, splits into parallel streams of existence, each universe carrying its own outcome. This concept challenges our habitual notion of reality, suggesting that what we experience as a final outcome merely constitutes one of infinitely many parallel outcomes.
Why Does the Quantum Paradigm Emerge Precisely Now?
Why does the quantum paradigm appear at a historical moment in which stable identities, grand narratives, meta-signifiers, and the idea of an objective, unified truth are collapsing?
As a tool for understanding such historical ruptures, I draw on Thomas Kuhn’s theory of scientific paradigms. According to Kuhn, science does not develop linearly and cumulatively, but through discontinuous transitions from one paradigm to another. A paradigmatic rupture does not occur merely because a new theory provides better explanations, but because the old paradigm is no longer able to respond to a growing number of anomalies that undermine its internal coherence.
However, Kuhn’s explanation must be supplemented by another dimension. A paradigm changes not only when it ceases to provide satisfactory scientific answers, but also when it can no longer meet the fundamental psychological and symbolic needs of its time. In this sense, a scientific paradigm ceases to be merely a theoretical framework and can be understood as an unconscious response to questions of identity, boundaries, and relations that a given historical period persistently poses.
Death of the Big Other
What led to the emergence of the new, quantum paradigm?
The end of the nineteenth century was marked by profound ruptures in the great meta-narratives that had long provided direction, meaning, and security to human experience. Nietzsche proclaimed the death of God and dismantled the idea of absolute values and universal truth; Freud discovered the unconscious and showed that the subject is not master in his own house; Marx exposed the historical and class-conditioned nature of knowledge and morality; Darwin removed the teleological image of the human being as a purposefully created entity; Bergson problematized linear and quantified time, introducing durée as the immediate, subjective flow of consciousness. Finally, mathematician Kurt Gödel revealed the limits of formal systems: no system can be a fully self-sufficient explanation of truth.
Across all these ruptures, the unified foundation of identity, meaning, and objective truth dissolves; subject, knowledge, and time become fragmented and multiple. The disappearance of the “objective, stable, and omnipotent observer” marks the loss of a superior source of meaning that had previously structured our experience and guided orientation. According to Lacan, modernism can be understood as a critical attempt to question and problematize the Big Other (l’Autre)—the symbolic Order and authority. Postmodernism goes a step further, seeking through radical deconstruction to diminish its omnipotence and relativize the stability of meaning.
In this vacuum of meaning, at the moment when old paradigms can no longer satisfy either epistemological or psychological needs, quantum physics emerges—a theoretical framework in which the results of measurement depend on the experimental context, opening a space for the return of the relation between observer and observed. It is, in effect, an attempt to bring back the lost—yet so desperately needed—observer onto the stage of experience and knowledge. In quantum physics, the observer does return, but only on a purely metaphysical level, devoid of any relationship or living encounter.
Parallel Identities
In psychoanalysis, this paradigm shift unfolds slowly. From the classical Freudian framework, where the relationship between analyst and patient remains only marginally articulated, toward contemporary approaches that situate the very structure of experience within relationship, the superposition of identities, and mutual presence. Contemporary psychoanalysis differs from quantum physics in that it draws upon phenomenology, ethics, and existentialism. Here we speak of a genuine, living experience of the encounter between I and Thou, something that physics cannot and must not possess—at least for now.
Similar to quantum mechanics, the theory of parallel identities depicts the subject as a field of simultaneously present and potentially contradictory perspectives. The fundamental form of this multiplicity is the superposition of the I–Thou relation. In a mature mode of being, the subject simultaneously occupies the position of observer and observed. In this state, both perspectives coexist and cannot be clearly distinguished. The questions “Who am I?” or “Who are you?” now lose all meaning. Only when circumstances or external pressures force one state to prevail does a collapse of superposition occur: one perspective becomes dominant, while the other temporarily recedes into the background. At times, we even speak of a split of personality.
Parallel Worlds
Indeed, in psychoanalysis we often encounter individuals who live in two or more inner worlds—states associated with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia—where different identity perspectives remain separated and do not communicate with one another. Such existence in parallel inner worlds can be compared to existence in parallel universes, as described by quantum physics. While physics seeks to measure and quantify these states, psychoanalysis attempts to determine them qualitatively through experience and empathy—that is, phenomenologically and ethically.
Superposition, or the simultaneity of I and Thou, thus represents a mature form of identity. It is a simultaneous being-in-oneself and being-in-the-Other, in which the perspectives of observer and observed merge into a unified yet multiple field of presence. Collapse marks the moment when the identity system can no longer sustain this simultaneity. In the psychoanalytic context, such a collapse corresponds to the phenomenon of psychological trauma, when a person is traumatically disillusioned with themselves or with the Other. This disillusionment or traumatic experience can be understood as an act of “measurement”—a moment in which the superposition of parallel identities ceases, and the subject must function through a more limited, reduced form of presence. After trauma, the person collapses into one state: they are now either I or Thou.
Quantum Metaphysics
What psychological needs does quantum physics fulfill?
In the age of Newtonian classical physics, the subject was embedded in a stable network of authority—God as the supreme observer, the king as political and social authority, the father as the shaper of private and moral order. Within this dense web of relations, the human being was fully defined and stable. Science of that era therefore did not require the concept of the observer: reality was externally determined, objective, and predictable. Identity, meaning, and significance derived from higher authorities rather than from immediate perception or individual decisions. In short, Newton did not require a physics that reflected on relation, relativity, and relationship.
Today, when classical authorities and meta-narratives have disappeared or lost their regulatory function, the subject no longer has a clear place in the world and must seek its own position in relation to reality. Thus, the contemporary physicist, too, must seek new paradigms as substitutes for relationship. One might say that Newton was immersed in relationship from beginning to end, whereas the contemporary physicist—like every inhabitant of modern society—is immersed in a state of profound existential loneliness. The modern scientist and artist are in a constant search for the Other, who continually eludes them.
Donald Winnicott
A well-known thought by the British psychoanalyst and pediatrician Donald Winnicott states: “The artist is a person driven by the tension between the need to communicate and the need to hide.” Paraphrasing this idea, we might say: “The scientist is a person torn between the need for an encounter with the Other, and the need to hide from the Other.” It is precisely this tension—between presence and withdrawal, between disclosure and concealment—that reflects the inner dynamic driving contemporary science.
Quantum physics, in this sense, can be viewed as an expression of a deep epistemological and psychological need to acknowledge a fundamental truth: the subject is always simultaneously observer and observed, always already in relation to the Other. Yet this insight—both paradoxical and radical—is often concealed behind technical measurements, mathematical formulas, and metaphysical constructions. Parallel identities become parallel worlds.
Thus, quantum physics, in its attempt not to be metaphysics and to realize encounter, actually flees from encounter and sinks ever deeper into metaphysics.
The Final Paradigm of Science
What should the final paradigm of science look like—one that does not seek merely objective truth, but responds to the needs of the human spirit and consciousness?
Such a final paradigm recognizes that measurement is not only quantitative but also qualitative, and that responsibility, care and Otherness are present in every act of perception. In this paradigm, ethics becomes its foundational principle—the final and comprehensive paradigm that complements objectivity and methodology, ensuring that science remains responsible, and aware of its role in shaping the world. In this sense, ethics, as philosopher Emmanuel Levinas asserts, is both the first and the last philosophy.
Similarly, the goal of psychotherapy is not the integration of identity into a single, stable form, but a return to a state of superposition in which the subject simultaneously functions as observer and observed, as I and Thou. Only through this dynamic of multiple perspectives is it possible to avoid the collapse of identity, which manifests as trauma, disillusionment, or inner rupture. Therapy thus becomes a space in which multiplicity is sustained, where the subject learns to be simultaneously within itself and within the Other, and where reality is experienced as a fluid, multilayered field of presence.
Within this final paradigm, science and therapy become spaces of freedom, presence, and ethical sensitivity—spaces in which multiplicity is not dismantled, but strengthened, opening new horizons of being.
Literature
Buber, M. (1937). I and Thou (R. G. Smith, Trans.). T. & T. Clark. (Original work published 1923)
Gödel, K. (1992). On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica and Related Systems (B. Meltzer, Trans.; R. B. Braithwaite, Intro.). Dover Publications.
Hofstadter, D. R. (1979). Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid. Basic Books.
Lacan, J. (1966). Écrits: A Selection (A. Sheridan, Trans.). W. W. Norton & Company.
Levinas, E. (1969). Totality and Infinity: An Essay on Exteriority (A. Lingis, Trans.). Duquesne University Press. (Original work published 1961)
Schrödinger, E. (1944). What Is Life? The Physical Aspect of the Living Cell. Cambridge University Press.
Nemet, V. (2025, May 28). New Psychoanalysis and Parallel Identities
