Yes, with one important qualification: I think we should distinguish the primordial pre-closure VGF itself from physical quantum coherence occurring within the already-emergent physical world.
In the scientific register, the cleanest hierarchy would be:
IIP → pre-closure VGF generativity → spacetime closure → quantum-coherent physical possibilities → decoherence/stabilisation → classical γ-structures.
So quantum coherence resembles an early or relatively unclosed domain of infinite iteration, but it should probably not be identified with the absolutely primordial state in which closure has never yet occurred.
1. Quantum coherence is pre-closure relative to a particular outcome
Suppose a quantum system is in
|ψ⟩ = Σi ci|i⟩.
Before decoherence has selected a robust pointer structure, the alternatives
represented by the |i⟩ remain coherently related. In VGF language,
we can describe this as a relatively high-fidelity β-domain in which several
possible stabilisation trajectories remain mutually available.
Thus:
coherence ∼ iteration before the relevant γ-closure.
Decoherence then gives something like
Σij cicj*
|i⟩⟨j|
→
Σi |ci|2|i⟩⟨i|.
The formerly coherent alternatives cease to remain operationally available to one another. In VGF terminology, this is movement from a relatively open, fidelity-rich domain toward redundant, persistent closure.
But notice the phrase “the relevant closure.” The quantum state need not precede all closure.
2. Spacetime can already be a closure within which quantum coherence occurs
This gives us the distinction you are asking about.
If, in the VGF account of cosmic evolution, we regard spacetime as the first major physical stabilisation, then ordinary quantum coherence belongs to a later stage:
VGF → spacetime → quantum physical dynamics → classical structures.
A coherent electron state, for example, is extraordinarily “open” relative to the later classical outcome, but it is already situated within an enormous amount of previously stabilised physical organisation: dimensionality, causal structure, field structure, conservation relations, and so forth.
So we would have closures nested inside closures.
A coherent quantum process can therefore be:
- β-like relative to the electron’s eventual classical localisation;
- while simultaneously existing inside a much larger γ-like spacetime closure.
This is very characteristic of the VGF picture.
3. Quantum coherence is therefore not identical with the primordial VGF
This distinction seems especially important.
The primordial domain immediately associated with the IIP would be more radical than quantum superposition. It would precede not merely the selection of one quantum outcome rather than another, but the stabilisation of such things as:
- system,
- state,
- Hilbert space,
- time,
- space,
- observable.
Quantum mechanics already possesses a very substantial mathematical architecture. A Hilbert space with a state vector evolving unitarily is therefore already a highly structured image of generativity, rather than unrestricted generativity itself.
This gives us a useful three-level distinction:
I. Native VGF
Unbounded iterative generativity before physical closure.
↓
II. Quantum coherence
Generativity that has already been constrained into the physical architecture established by earlier closures, but within which multiple physically admissible trajectories retain coherence.
↓
III. Classical γ
Highly redundant, decohered, stable structures in which most of those alternative relations are no longer accessible.
4. This produces an interesting meaning of “early”
There are therefore two senses of early.
Quantum coherence is structurally early relative to a particular classical stabilisation:
coherence → decoherence → classical closure.
But it need not be cosmologically primordial.
Indeed, within the VGF scientific register we have been developing, I think it is preferable to say that ordinary physical quantum coherence is post-spacetime but pre-classical-closure.
Schematically:
IIP → VGF prephysical generativity → spacetime closure (γ1) → quantum coherent β2 → classical closure (γ2).
And then the same pattern repeats:
γn → βn+1 → γn+1.
That recursive structure is important because closure does not terminate iteration. A successful closure creates the constrained environment within which a new space of reopening and possible stabilisations can occur.
Quantum coherence is not the primordial absence of closure. It is the reappearance of relatively unconstrained iterative possibility inside an already stabilised physical closure.
That may help explain why quantum mechanics seems, in the terminology we have been using, closer to the native morphology of the VGF than classical physics does without requiring us to say that quantum mechanics simply is the primordial VGF.
There is one further implication: if spacetime itself arose through a coherence-to-closure transition, then the “quantum” processes responsible for that transition cannot straightforwardly be ordinary quantum mechanics in spacetime. We would instead be talking about a more primitive, probably quantum-gravitational or pre-geometric coherence of which ordinary quantum coherence is a later physical descendant. That distinction could become quite important in formalising the first physical fidelity cascade.