Quantum will

The definition takes a physical fact and asks who is doing it. Quantum indeterminacy, the probability cloud preceding all interactions even at the most elemental level, resolves into a single outcome, and Marsh's framework treats that resolution as a choice and therefore as requiring a chooser. Will is that which chooses, and the quantum will controls quantum interactions and may be sublated to the emotional self, which includes external wills, or to the conscious. That is how the same faculty appears at the scale of a particle and at the scale of a person, since sublation is what connects them. Two consequences follow that matter elsewhere. Will is not confined to living things, since a will must be exercised to bind a macroscopic object together and need not be under conscious or emotional control, which is what allows an object to be an animus. And time becomes a product of will rather than a container for it, since if there is a we that follows or creates time it can only be the will, being the part of the person that chooses direction, and time follows the second law of thermodynamics because the will desires it. The pursuit of happiness is the pursuit of greater entropy for the conscious will and of lower entropy for the emotional will, which is why the two produce opposite behaviour from the same faculty.

The measurement problem in quantum mechanics is unresolved and the interpretations differ on exactly this point, with Copenhagen treating collapse as fundamental, many-worlds denying it and hidden variable theories positing underlying determinism. Von Neumann and Wigner entertained a role for consciousness in collapse, a position now held by very few physicists. Panpsychism has been revived in philosophy of mind, with Galen Strawson and Philip Goff arguing that experience is fundamental. Marsh's proposal is closest to the Wigner line and extends it further, since she places not experience but choice at the elemental level, which is a stronger claim and one physics does not require.